MAHENDRA UTTAMRAO CHAVAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is convicted of the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous Imprisonment for life and to pay fine of rupees 1000 in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. This order of conviction and sentence passed upon him by 2nd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, on 26-10-2004 is impugned by the appellant in the present appeal.

(2.) The prosecution case, in nutshell, is that Uttamrao Chavan is native of village Jalgao; Tq. Vaijapur, District Aurangabad. His agricultural land situated is within the area of Jalgao adjoins river Dheku on the West. Field of Haribhau bhagwat (P. W. 8) is to the east of river Dheku. There is a bore well and pipe line in the field of P. W. 8 by the side of the river. Near the bore well a pit is dug for the percolation of the water. This place is used by his family and the family of the complainant (P. W. 1) for washing clothes. P. W. 8 resides at his house with his wife Nehabai 9 (P. W. 4) , his mother, who is blind and deaf, son Chandrakant (P. W. 12) and daughter-in-law. Crop of sugarcane and cotton was planted in some portion of the field and grass was taken from the portion near the bore well. Lasur-Jalgao Road is to the east of the house of P. W. 8. Field of Prakash Tambe (P. W. 9) is to the east of this road. Uttamrao resides at the village with his wife kantabai (not examined) and two sons Ganesh (complainant) and Mahendra (appellant). Ganesh married Sadhana (deceased) on 20-2-2003. Appellant had an evil eye on the deceased and had caught her hand on one occasion with intention to seduce her. The deceased disclosed this fact to her husband and mother-in-law. Since then by way of precaution, either the complainant or his mother used to be constantly in the company of the deceased. Suresh Gaikwad and Changdeo hajare, who are friends of the complainant, came to know about the conduct of the appellant. Eventually, the news leaked and became a topic of discussion in the village. Parents of the complainant, were not in favour of separating the appellant, therefore the complainant was thinking of taking up a job and leaving the house.

(3.) At the time of the marriage of the deceased, her father-in-law purchased ornaments for her, worth Rs. 28,633 from the shop of Dineshkumar Mutha (P. W. 5). On 17-7-2003, appellant took ornaments of his mother and the ornaments of the deceased purchased from the shop of P. W. 5. At about 8. 00 or 8. 30 in the morning, appellant went to the shop of P. W. 5, produced the receipt and sold these ornaments to P. W. 5 for Rs. 21,000/ -. Maternal aunt of the appellant had kept her ornaments with her sister for safe keeping. The appellant took these ornaments and sold them through Ajay Nagare (P. W. 11) for Rs. 7500/ -. The appellant, however, returned these ornaments when he was persuaded by his relatives. The fact that the appellant tried to molest her and had stolen ornaments, was disclosed by the deceased and her husband to the parents of the deceased.