MAROTI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is taking exception to the judgment and order passed by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna in Sessions Case No. 26 of 1996 dtd. 22/5/2003, by which he stood convicted for offence punishable under Sec. 323 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC] and is sentenced to suffer 6 months imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.200.00.

(2.) Moujpuri Police Station, Taluka Jalna entertained the complaint filed by father of deceased Vijaymala, who committed suicide on account of alleged harassment and ill-treatment meted out to her by her husband and in-laws. On 16/2/1995, informant Asruba (father of deceased) lodged report stating therein that his daughter Vijaymala was married to Maroti (accused no.1) about five years back and after marriage, she went to reside with her husband and in-laws. Out of marriage and cohabitation, she delivered two girls. He reported that initially for two years, she was treated well. However, thereafter whenever she came for festivals, she informed that accused persons were subjecting her to physical ill-treatment. They did not provide her food and kept her starved. Whenever she came to her maternal home, she informed about above ill-treatment meted out to her. After spending three months after delivery, she went back to husband and in-laws. Two months thereafter, they got news that Vijaymala committed suicide. He reported that said suicide was only because of ill-treatment of accused and thereby he lodged report Exhibit 73 which was made the basis of registration of crime and husband and in-laws were indicted for offence punishable under Ss. 304-B, 306, 498-A r/w 34 of IPC and they were duly chargesheeted, upon which they were made to face trial before learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna, who, vide Sessions Case No. 26 of 1996, recorded statements under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, conducted trial, appreciated evidence and on hearing both sides, reached to the conclusion that prosecution failed to bring home the charges for offences punishable under Ss. 304-B, 306, 498-A r/w 34 of IPC and acquitted all accused from said charges. However, accused husband (appellant herein) alone is held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 323 of IPC and he is sentenced to suffer 6 months imprisonment and to pay fine. Above judgment and order dtd. 22/5/2003 is hereby questioned by the appellant-husband by filing instant appeal on various grounds mentioned in the appeal memo.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that there was false implication and complaint was false, fabricated, afterthought and out of annoyance of losing Vijaymala. He pointed out that it is not known whether consumption was suicidal or accidental. He pointed out that prosecution had failed in bringing home charge under Ss. 304-B, 306, 498-A of IPC and therefore, when entire charge for which the appellant and his relatives were chargesheeted and tried, not being proved, they were all acquitted from said charge. Therefore, there was nothing in support of offence under Sec. 323 IPC. He pointed out that even there was no distinct charge under Sec. 323 IPC.