BHASKAR JANARDHAN MANE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant herein is convicted for offence punishable under section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and pay fine of Rs. 500/- i.d. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further period of three months in Sessions Case No. 93/1994 by 4th Additional Sessions Judge. Solapur vide Judgment and Order dated 30/07/1994. Appellant herein was charged for offences punishable under sections 323, 504 & 328 of Indian Penal Code, however, he is acquitted for the said charges. Being aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction, appellant has preferred this appeal. Such of the facts which are necessary for the decision of this appeal are as follows.

(2.) Appellant was married to Laxmibai on 18/051993. After marriage. Laxmibai had been to her matrimonial home at Wadaje. Laxmibai resided in her matrimonial home, initially for 15 days and thereafter, had returned to her maternal house for a short period. That Laxmibai was crippled by one leg and she was polio stricken. She happened to be a distant relative of the present appellant and both the family members were well acquainted with each other. It is alleged that on 07/02/1994, Laxmibai approached the police station and lodged the report that her marriage with the present appellant was not consummated. There used to be intermittent quarrels between the couple. She used to visit her maternal house quite often. She had been to her maternal house on the occasion of Sankrant festival. After she returned to matrimonial house, her husband had refused to consummate the marriage. It is alleged that he was insisting upon her to sleep with Chandrakant Chivari, Vithal Chivari & Satyawan Dudhal. Complainant was annoyed with the said gesture of her husband. She had informed her father Limbaji Bansode about the same. A discordant note had struck between her and her in-laws. She has further alleged that on 06 02/1994 at about 7.00 pm. she was sleeping outside her hut and at that time, her husband i.e. present appellant insisted upon her to go and sleep with Vithal Dudhal. She flatly refused to oblige. At that juncture, her husband had forcibly administered some spurious substance into her mouth. According to her, it was a poisonous substance. She felt giddy and was feeling uneasy. She raised hue and cry. Upon hearing cries, her father-in-law, brother-in-law and other people assembled and had taken her to Civil Hospital. She was admitted in the Civil Hospital where, she vomited. She has further stated that since she refused to sleep with other persons, her husband had administered poison to her. On the basis of her report, crime No. 18/1994 was registered at Taluka Police Station, Solapur for offence punishable under section 328, 498(A), 509 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. Accused was arrested on 07/02/1994. Investigation was completed and charge-sheet was filed on 31/03/1994. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as Sessions Case No. 93/1994. The prosecution has examined 10 witnesses to bring home the guilt of the accused.

(3.) P.W. 1 is the complainant Laxmibai. She has deposed before the Court in consonance with the F.I.R. lodged by her. She has proved the contents of the F.I.R. which is at exhibit 9. It is elicited in the cross-examination that her father-in-law's mother was sister of her maternal grandmother. That the matrimonial house was located in slum area at Wadaje and that there are about 25-30 huts adjoining to her house. According to her, police had recorded her statement on two occasions i.e. at about 5.00 am on 07/02/2014 and then in the midnight. She has admitted that she had not disclosed to the police that she had requested her husband to sleep with her or that he had told her that he would sleep with her only if, she would go to sleep with other three persons. The reason assigned for not stating the same is that she did not understand the procedure properly. There are inherent omissions in her cross-examination which pertains to the offence punishable under section 323 & 328 of Indian Penal Code, however, appellant is acquitted of the said charges and there being no appeal against acquittal, the said contentions need not be taken into consideration. It is apparent on the face of record that there is no allegation of assault.