PRABHAKAR APPASAHEB BHISE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has challenged his conviction under sections 302 and 498a of the indian Penal Code and the sentence imposed upon him by the Additional sessions Judge, Pandharpur.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is that the accused appellant subject the deceased, his wife, to cruelty by often beating her. This beating was on account of his unsatiated demands for money. The deceased Mangal was married to the appellant for about 10 years and they had two daughters. The appellant worked on agricultural lands along with his wife. He desired to install a pipeline for his lands for which he required Rs. 15000/ -. He insisted on Mangal satisfying this demand for money through her parents and brother. It appears that the parents of the deceased were unable to satisfy this demand. The appellant, therefore, dropped her at her brother's place. After eight days on 7-3-2000, when mangal was having her afternoon nap, the appellant entered the house and pulled her out of the house. He started beating her in the presence of her mother Laxmi and her daughter. He pushed her a certain distance from the house. Her mother followed them and witnessed the appellant push the deceased to the ground, put his legs on her chest and give severe blows with a chopper on her head and her left cheek. The mother shouted, hoping that somebody would rescue her daughter. A few people were approaching the spot when the appellant noticed them. He therefore fled away, leaving his wife in a pool of blood. She was then lifted on a bullock cart in order to take her to village Yelvi, accompanied by her mother and other persons. The appellant's brother who approached them from the opposite direction was told of incident. He then complained to the police. Investigations were carried out by the police. The appellant was arrested on 9-3-2000, wearing a blood stained shirt. The necessary panchanamas were drawn up and various articles including the clothes of the deceased and the appellant were seized and sent for examination to the Chemical analyser. An autopsy was conducted at Jat Rural hospital. After the investigations were complete, the appellant was charge-sheeted and committed to the Court of Sessions for trial.

(3.) The prosecution has relied on the evidence of two eye witnesses. PW3, the mother of the deceased, PW5, her neighbour. PW3 has described the ill treatment meted out to the deceased by the appellant. She has then described the incident that she witnessed on 7-3-2000. She has described how the appellant pushed the deceased to the ground and placed his knees on her chest. She has also narrated that the appellant pierced the cheek of the deceased and that he assaulted the deceased on her head with a chopper. She has deposed that she shouted for help when PW7 arrived at the spot, besides other persons. She has mentioned that the appellant on seeing these persons approaching the spot, ran away. According to her, PW5 helped with his bullock cart in which he and others accompanied Mangal who was then breathing her last. She has categorically stated that the only reason that the appellant was harassing the deceased was that his demands for money had remained unfulfilled. PW3 has also stated that she accompanied her daughter in the bullock cart and narrated the incident to her son pw4 whom she met on the way.