VINAYAK BABURAOJI KUREKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal is preferred by the original Complainant challenging the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Additional Session Judge, Nagpur in Session Trial No.350/2007 dtd. 29/9/2009.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case emerges from the Police papers and recorded evidence are as under:

(3.) Heard Mr. Deshpande, learned Counsel holding for Mr. Morande learned Counsel for the Appellant/Complainant and submitted that, the evidence of PW-1/Vinayak Kurekar, PW-2/Sachin Kurekar and PW-3/Devendra Kurekar consistently stated that prior to marriage the dowry was fixed. At the time of marriage, the Complainant could not fulfill the demand of motorcycle and on that count the deceased was consistently ill-treated, which resulted into her death due to burning. Their evidence shows specific instances as to the demand of dowry and the ill-treatment at the hands of the accused persons. The said evidence is further substantiated by the independent witness PW-4/Kousar Anjum, who is the friend of the deceased to whom the deceased has disclosed about the ill-treatment. Thus, the consistent evidence corroborated by the spot panchnama and the evidence of the Investigating Officer shows that the death of the deceased is otherwise than a normal circumstance, and therefore, the offence under Sec. 304-B of the Indian Penal Code is attracted. Alternatively, he submitted that, the deceased has committed suicide as she fed up with the ill-treatment at the hands of the accused persons. The evidence of these witnesses is not shattered during the cross-examination. In view of that, the impugned judgment is perverse and liable to be quashed and set aside.