PRADEEP S/O. MANIK Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this appeal is to a judgment and order of conviction and consequential sentence dtd. 27/10/2020, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Sessions Case, No.279/2016. Vide impugned judgment and order, the appellant was convicted for offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act for short). He has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00 with default stipulation for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code with further direction that the appellant shall not be released from the captivation until his life. No separate sentence has been awarded for the offence punishable under the POCSO Act. He was acquitted of the offence punishable under Sec. 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Ss. 4/25 of the Arms Act.

(2.) Facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows :- P.W.1 Tirthaprasad was resident of Ahmednagar. He would reside along with his wife and their son. He would serve with a private Company at MIDC, Ahmednagar. His wife was serving as a Conductor with Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) at Shirur. One Tanaji Suryawanshi, resident of village Hadgaon, Taluka Nilanga, District Latur was P.W.1's co-brother. Kum. Mohini (deceased) was Tanaji's daughter. She had appeared for 10 th Standardexamination in 2016 at her grand parent's place at village Talni. For Summer Vacation she had come to the house of P.W.1 Tirthaprasad at Ahmednagar.

(3.) On the fateful day i.e. 27/5/2016, both P.W.1 Tirthaprasad and his wife had left the house for their respective work place/s. Their son had gone to his grand parent's house. As such, Mohini was alone at home. By 11.00 in the morning on the fateful day, the appellant went to the house of P.W.1 Tirthaprasad. It appears that, both the appellant and Mohini (deceased) were emotionally involved. They had even married in a temple at Ahmednagar. What went wrong between the two is not known. Mohini had not completed 18 years of age. The appellant, by going to the house of P.W.1 Tirthaprasad, assaulted Mohini with sharp sickle. He gave her number of blows with the sickle. He then left the house of P.W.1 Tirthaprasad and directly went to Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar. He reported to the Police Station Officer to have killed his wife. A Station Diary entry was made to that effect. Services of employees of Municipal Corporation were availed for acting as panchas. In their presence, the sickle and blood stained clothes on the person of the appellant were seized. The Police Station Officer informed his higher-ups. The police officials went to the crime scene. Dead body of Mohini was found lying in a pool of blood. A crime scene panchanama was drawn. Her dead body was shifted to Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar. Inquest panchanama (Exh.38) and autopsy (Exh.51) were conducted on her mortal remains on 27/5/2016. The landlady in whose premises P.W.1 Tirthaprasad was residing, informed P.W.1 Tirthaprasad on phone. He immediately came. He even informed his wife. She too arrived. He then lodged First Information Report (F.I.R.- Exh.16) with Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar. The appellant was arrested. He was medically examined before arrest. Statements of persons acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case were recorded. All the seized articles were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Nasik for chemical analysis and report. During interrogation, the appellant made disclosure statement. He led the police to the shop wherefrom he purchased the sickle. Then he took the police to a shop whereat he got it sharpened. Thereafter he took the police to a shop wherefrom he bought a cloth bag to keep the sickle therein. It was also found that the appellant along with his friend had come to Ahmednagar on the previous day. They had stayed in a hotel, "Chetana" at Maliwada overnight. Upon completion of the investigation, a chargesheet was filed.