SAMBHAJI MAHADEO KADAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal takes exception to the Judgment and Order passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur dated november, 19, 2003 in Sessions Case No. 79 of 2000. The appellants/accused nos. 1, 2 and 3 were charge-sheeted and tried for offence punishable under sections 498-A, 304-B, 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the IPC).

(2.) The trial Court on the analysis of evidence on record has found appellants guilty of offence punoshable under sections 498-A, 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. All the accused are acquitted of the offence punishable under section 304 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The state has not challenged that part of the finding reached by the trial Court. Accordingly, the scope of present Appeal revolves around the correctness of the view taken by the trial Court with regard to offence under sections 498-A, 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that accused No. 1 who is the son of accused Nos. 2 and 3 was married to Sujata on 5th February, 1999. The marriage was settled only after the complainant (PW 4) -father of Sujata agreed to pay dowry amount of Rs. 80,000/ (Rupees Eighty Thousand) , two tola gold and other household articles such as cupboard, cot, utensils. It is alleged that as per the agreement, complainant (PW 4) paid Rs. 70,000/- (Rupees Seventy thousand) and also gave articles referred to above including two tola gold at the time of marriage to the accused It is alleged that on account of outstanding amount of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) , soon after fifteen days from the date of marriage, the accused started causing harassment to Sujata with a view to coercing her and in particular, the complainant (PW 4) -her father to comply with the unlawful demand. It is alleged that since the payment of balance amount of rs. 10,000/- was not made, the harassment continued, and being fed up with that harassment, Sujata left her matrimonial house and stayed with her parents. It is alleged that the complainant paid the balance dowry amount of Rs. 10,000/ -. Even after payment of the balance dowry amount of Rs. 10,000/-, the harassment to Sujata continued. It is alleged That the accused continued harassment even after receiving the dowry amount on the ground that unwarranted publicity was given of the fact that the accused were insisting for payment of balance dowry amount. It is also the prosecution case that accused continued with the harassment of sujata, as they suspected her character and chastity. It is alleged that Sujata left her matrimonial house and started staying with her parents. Eventually on 13th may, 2001, on receiving message from accused persons, the complainant (PW4) along with other common friends and relatives went to the house of accused along with Sujata. In the meeting, there was discussion about the cohabitation of sujata with accused. It is alleged that in the meeting, accused No. 2 uttered some insulting words to the complainant (PW 4) , which resulted in exchange of hot words. Thereafter, accused No. 2 filed criminal complaint in Police Station against the informant. However, subsequently, the disputes were amicably settled. It is stated that accused Nos. 1 and 2 agreed to execute undertaking on stamp paper to look after Sujata properly when she would be in her matrimonial house. Similarly, Sujata executed undertaking on stamp paper that she will behave properly with the accused. On executing the undertakings, Sujata went back to her matrimonial house on 15th May, 2000 in the evening at about 5. 30 p. m. It is alleged that on 17th May, 2000, complainant (PW 4) received message from Shri Rajaram Dhondiba Gore (PW 1) about the death of Sujata on account of consumption of some poisonous pesticide. He was told that Sujata was admitted in Cottage Hospital, Pandharpur. The said information, in the first place, was received by Shri Rajaram Gore from one Chandan Shive, the neighbour of the accused. On receiving; the information about death of Sujata, complainant rushed to the hospital. The dead body of Sujata was sent for post-mortem and on completing that formality, the body was handed over to the relatives. On the same evening, on 17th May, 2000, funeral of Sujata was performed. Complainant (PW4) went to the Police Station on 18th May, 2000, at about 12. 00 noon and registered First Intformation Report being Crime No. 87 of 2000, alleging that Sujata committed suicide due to the harassment caused to her by the accused persons with a view to coerce her and the complainant (PW 4) to meet unlawful demand and on account of failure to meet such demand.