MALHARI NANA SATAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Respondents 2 to 7 are acquitted of the offence punishable under sections 302 read with Section34 and 498-A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar. This order has been impugned in the present Revision.

(2.) Facts in nutshell are that Respondent No. 2 married Chhaya (deceased) on18-03-1993. After marriage Respondent No. 2 and members of her family were asking Chhaya to bring Tape Recorder and TV from her parents. As the demand was not fulfilled, deceased Chhaya was subjected to torture mental as well as physical torture. On 20-12-1993, Respondent no.7 Nabubai w/o Kondiba Todkar, had taken Chhaya to her parental house as she was sick. On that occasion also, Chhaya made a grievance about ill-treatment. Nanubai brought Chhaya to matrimonial house on13-12-1993. On that occasion, her sister Mangal and brother Dharma (PW-2) accompanied Chhaya. On that night, Chhaya, Mangal, Dharma and Baban (Respondent No. 2) were sleeping in the hut. However, as Dharma was not comfortable, Baban and Dharma went to the Chhapri of the house for sleeping. At about10. 00 p. m. , the hut where Chhaya and Mangal were sleeping, caught fire. Arjun and Ramchandra were making efforts to douse the fire. In view of the commotion others including respondent No. 2 and Dharma came to the scene of occurrence. However, the fire could not be extinguished. As a result, Chhaya and Mangal were burnt to death.

(3.) Shri. A. D. Godbharle, Adv. h/for SHRI. M. Y. Deshmukh, learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner-Malhari, his wife Bheemabai and other relatives have testified to the ill-treatment. This evidence has not been properly appreciated. As the evidence is ignored, the trial Court has committed an error, therefore, the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court deserves to be quashed and set aside and the matter deserves to be remanded for re-trial.