GOPAL MADHU PAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal arises out of the judgment and order dtd. 22/9/2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 28 of 2013, whereby the sole Appellant (accused) was convicted under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC'), for committing the murder of his wife- Bharati and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay fine of Rs.1,000.00, in default, rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) The prosecution case, as unfolded from the material available on record, is to the effect that the appellant (accused) Gopal Madhu Pawar was in the habit of drinking alcohol on regular basis. On 29/8/2012, the appellant had asked his wife Bharati to give her mangalsutra apparently for selling the same so as to consume alcohol. It was around 2:00 p.m. in the afternoon and at that time, the appellant was present in his house alongwith his wife Bharati. Responding to the demand to hand over the mangalsutra made by the appellant, his wife Bharati had asked him not to sell the same. On that, the accused got annoyed. He poured kerosene on the person of his wife Bharati and set her on fire. When Bharati raised a hue and cry and came running out of her house, her relative Shakuntala (PW-6) and the appellant took Bharati to the Nagar Palika Hospital, at Lonavala, by a rickshaw. The hospital, however, refused to admit Bharati. As such, the cousin of Shakuntala, viz. Bhiva Pawar took Bharati to her parents house at Unere. Later on, upon receipt of information about the incident, the SHO of Pali Police Station took Bharati to the Primary Health Centre at Pali by the police jeep wherein, she was admitted. Dr. Jaiswal (PW-4) examined the injured-victim. Her statement was recorded by PW-3 Mr. Kokate, after being certified by the doctor that the victim was in a fit state of mind to record her statement. Within minutes thereafter, the Executive Magistrate Mr. Vetkoli (PW-5), on receiving the requisition from the SHO of Pali Police Station, came to the hospital and recorded the statement of Bharati after obtaining the opinion of the doctor about her state of mind. The statements recorded by the PW-3 and PW-5, on the same day, within a gap of about 20 minutes, have been treated as dying declarations of the victim. The victim died in the hospital on 1/9/2012. On 2/9/2012, the accused was arrested and the mangalsutra was seized from him. Initially, although C.R. No. 89 of 2012 was registered under Sec. 307 of the IPC, later on, Sec. 302 of the IPC was added. On completion of investigation in connection with C.R. No. 89 of 2012 of Pali Police Station, the Investigating Officer, i.e., PW-10 had submitted charge-sheet against the accused, based on which, charge was framed against him under Sec. 302 of the IPC. On conclusion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge had convicted the appellant under Sec. 302 of the IPC for committing the murder of his wife Bharati and sentenced him as aforesaid.

(3.) The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. The two dying declarations (Exh. 16 ) and (Exh.26), were pressed into service by the prosecution so as to secure the conviction of the appellant. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the seized articles, including the bottle where kerosene was found as well as the two dying declarations of the victim, the learned trial Court had convicted the appellant for committing offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the IPC.