STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. DIGAMBER RAMRAO SHINGANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has preferred this appeal to impugn acquittal of the respondent recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of the Penal Code.

(2.) The facts which lead to the prosecution of the respondent are tragic. THE respondent was married to Rajkanya-complainant around 1983. This marriage led to birth of daughter Savita. THEreafter Rajkanya conceived and delivered a male child. Accused Digamber went to bring back his family to the matrimonial home after delivery. After return to the matrimonial home accused Digamber used to ask Rajkanya to kill the newly born child because he believed that it was not born of him. This led to quarrels. On 07-12-1987 at about6. 00 a. m. the accused took the child and started leaving the house. Wife Rajkanya followed him to take the child back, but Digamber threw the child in a well and also pushed Rajkanya in the well. Police Patil of the village came to know of the incident and went to the well. He learnt from Rajkanya as to what had happened and gave a report to the police. THEreupon, the police registered an offence. THE newly born child was dead, and after an inquest, body was sent for Post Mortem examination. THE police performed panchnama of the spot, recorded statements of the witnesses and on completion of investigation filed charge-sheet before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Achalpur.

(3.) The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the learned trial Judge ought to have accepted the eyewitness account of Rajkanya and convicted the respondent of murder as well as attempted murder. He submits that there was enough motive for the respondent to commit this ghastly act of killing an infant. THErefore, he wanted the judgment of the trial Court to be reversed.