SANTOSH PRAKASH SONONE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 16th Dec., 2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Akola, in Sessions Trial No. 3 of 2013 convicting the appellant-accused No. 1, Santosh Prakash Sonone, of offences punishable under Sec. 498-A, Indian Penal Code, and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000.00, in default, further Rigorous Imprisonment for six months, and Sec. 306, Indian Penal Code [Rigorous Imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000.00, in default, further Rigorous Imprisonment for six months], the present appeal has been filed by the appellant.

(2.) In brief, the case of the prosecution was that deceased Pallavi, who was aged about twenty years, was married with the appellant, Santosh, in March, 2011, and in marriage her father had given a golden ring of five grams and Rs. 25,000.00 by way of dowry. After Pallavi went to reside with her husband at the matrimonial house, she was being harassed for bringing Rs. 50,000.00 from her father for purchase of a motorcycle. When appellant, Santosh, had visited the house of parents of deceased, Pallavi, on the occasion of Diwali, her father had gifted him a mobile phone handset worth Rs. 5,000.00. Thereafter, on 5th Dec., 2011, in the afternoon, Pallavi set herself on fire and neighbourers saw smoke coming out of her house and they threw water and put off the fire. Police was informed. She was burnt and dead. Her landlord intimated her father. Police registered an Accidental Death case and thereafter made investigations. Pallavi had hundred per cent burn injuries. Thereafter investigation was completed and charge-sheet was filed. Trial Court heard the evidence and convicted the appellant alone, since there were other accused persons, namely father, mother along with him, who obviously were acquitted. Hence this appeal.

(3.) In support of the appeal, Mr. Kashid, the learned counsel for the appellant, vehemently argued that the learned Trial Judge committed an error in convicting the appellant of offences under Sections 498-A and 306 of Indian Penal Code, when there was no iota of evidence against the appellant. According to him, the Trial Judge acquitted the other accused persons of the self-same charges, but on the same evidence, recorded conviction of the appellant, which was wholly wrong and illegal. He then submitted that the Trial Judge was much impressed with the fact of marriage having taken place before nine months before the date of death. But then, there is no concrete presumption and the same is rebutable. In the instant case, according to Mr. Kashid, the prosecution failed to prove its case and discharge the initial burden of proof. According to him, the cross-examinations of the witnesses themselves show that deceased Pallavi had made no complaint about the alleged ill-treatment or her mental condition to commit suicide and, therefore, it was wrong to convict the appellant of the said offences. He, therefore, prayed for allowing the appeal.