VIJAYKUMAR NINGAPPA HOTKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A young girl, Shubhangi, got married to the appellant on 11-12-2006. Shubhangi's parents resided at some distance from her matrimonial home. In the month of February, 2001, the appellant dropped her at her parents' home. Shubhangi complained to her parents about the ill treatment and cruelty meted out to her by the appellant. The appellant came to fetch Shubhangi from her parents' home on 25-4-2001. Shubhangi's parents were not willing to send her back with the appellant because of the mental torture that she had faced. However, since the appellant convinced them about his good behaviour thereafter, they permitted her to leave with the appellant on 27-4-2001. On 30-5-2001, Shubhangi's father in law admitted her to the Civil Hospital, solapur as she had suffered severe burns in her house. The dying declaration of shubhangi was recorded after ensuring that she was in a mentally fit state to have her statement recorded. Shubhangi stated that she had been burnt by the appellant who set fire to her after pouring kerosene on her. She succumbed to her injuries on 31-5-2001. The appellant was arrested on 30-5-2001, pursuant to the statement of Shubhangi and was charged for having murdered his wife under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. His trial was committed to the I Ad hoc additional Sessions Judge, Solapur.

(2.) The prosecution has; relied upon the evidence of 10 witnesses to prove its case against the appellant. , PW 1 is the father of the victim Shubhangi. He has deposed about the cruelty suffered by the victim at the hands of the appellant. He has also deposed that within two months of her marriage, Shubhangi complained to her mother that the appellant was treating her cruelly. The appellant complained to Shubhangi's parents that Shubhangi was not behaving properly with him. He told them to take away their daughter if she did not want to improve her behaviour. It appears that from the evidence of PW 1 that he pacified the appellant and requested him not to quarrel with his daughter. About l1/2 months before the death of Shubhangi, the appellant again complained to PW 1, telephonically, about Shubhangi's behaviour. The appellant had asked the witness to take his daughter away. Since the witness could not do so on that day, being unwell, the appellant dropped Shubhangi off at her parental home around midnight. On being questioned, t:he appellant mentioned that he suspected shubhangi's fidelity and therefore, did not want her in his house. The appellant left his father-in law's house the next morning. He phoned PW 1 a few days later and requested him to send Shubhangi to her matrimonial home. The witness refused to do so. However, on 23-4-2001, the appellant went to his in-laws' residence in order to bring back Shubhangi. Despite the refusal by her parents, the appellant stayed in their home Jill 26-4-2001. A neighbour of PW 1 advised shubhangi's parents not to quarrel with the appellant and to send Shubhangi back to her matrimonial home, looking to her future. Accepting this advice, PW 1 sent shubhangi along with the accused on 27-4-2001 to her matrimonial home, much against his will. On 30-5-2001, approximately a month after she had left her parental home, PW 1 received a call from the appellant's brother Sanjay informing him that Shubhangi had got burnt when she was set on fire after pouring kerosene on her person. On being questioned who was responsible for this act, Sanjay disconnected the phone. PW 1 and his wife reached Solapur Civil hospital at about 8 pm on that day. However, Shubhangi was declared dead by about 7 pm. The cross-examination of this witness does not in any manner cast a doubt on his examination-in-chief. There are no material contradictions in the cross-examination. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of this witness.

(3.) The evidence of PW 1 is corroborated by PW 2, the neighbour. This witness has disclosed that the complainant i. e. , PW 1 was not willing to send his daughter Shubhangi back to the accused since he suspected her character. PW 2 has taken part in the discussions held between the father of Shubhangi and the appellant. This witness has stated that he convinced both the appellant and PW 1 to refrain from quarrelling. He then also ensured that Shubhangi was sent to her marital home with the appellant on 27-4-2001 in the afternoon. PW 3 is shubhangi's mother. She has corroborated the evidence of her husband, PW 1. She has also mentioned regarding the phone call that was received from Sanjay, the brother of the appellant on 30-5-2001 informing them that Shubhangi had committed a suicide by burning herself.