VAIJNATH RAMJI WAMAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is convicted for committing murder of his wife and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under section 302 and rigorous imprisonment for two years for offence punishable under section 498a of the Penal Code with default stipulation for the payment of fine, by Additional Sessions Judge; Hingoli. This order of conviction and sentence dated 14th March, 2005 is impugned in the present appeal.

(2.) Brief facts, leading to the filing of this appeal, are that Murlidhar bapurao Jadhav (P. W. 4) is working as security guard in T. V. centre at Hingoli. He constructed a house in Chandranagar, Hingoli with his co-worker Shri uttamrao Palve. First husband of his daughter Usha (since deceased) died of h. I. V. Her father in law paid Rupees 1,00,000/- to her for her maintenance. Appellant was practicing law in the Courts at Hingoli. With the help of advocate, Kawarkhe, Adv. Bangar and some other lawyers, marriage of Usha was settled with the appellant who was a divorcee. Deceased remarried appellant, on 16th June, 2002. After the marriage, P. W. 4 rented first floor of the house of shri Ashok Mandade, which is near to his own house and the newly married couple, started living at the house vacated by him. From the very next day of the marriage appellant started suspecting chastity of his wife and was ill-treating her. Since three months prior to the incident, the appellant was asking deceased to bring Rs. 1,00,000/- from her parents. Prior to the incident, on 26th May, 2003 deceased demanded Rs. 5/- for cosmetics. Appellant beat her with leather belt for demanding money for the cosmetics and threatened to divorce her. On 31st May, 2003, in the morning, appellant asked the deceased to bring Rs. 1,00,000/- from her father. He severely beat her and threatened to kill her if she failed to bring money within 24 hours. As she had suffered unbearable pain, the deceased was crying. Ramesh, son of Shri Palve, appraised parents of the deceased of the incident at about 11. 00 a. m. P. W. 4 and his wife Meerabai (P. W. 5) thus went to the house of their daughter. Neighbours Shri Palve and his wife Laxmibai (P. W. 6) were also present at the house of the deceased. The deceased narrated her plight to them. P. W. 4 took her to their house. He then went to the Court and consulted the mediators. Adv. Kawarkhe told him that he would reason with the appellant and asked him not to worry. The deceased returned to her house at about 4. 00 p. m. On his return to the house, appellant scolded the deceased as her father had been to the Court, to meet the lawyers. He told her that the domestic disputes should not have been publicized. Appellant further told the deceased that her parents should never come to their house in future.

(3.) On the morning of 1st June, 2003, Ajay Mendale (P. W. 13) son of the landlord of P. W. 4, delivered milk to Palves and the deceased at about 6. 00 o'clock in the morning. At that time the appellant was asleep. The deceased sent a chit to her parents with P. W. 13, informing her parents that the appellant has promised not to beat her if they do not come to her house and do not interfere in her family affairs. At about 9. 00 a. m. appellant asked the deceased to bring rs. 1,00,000/- from her father. The deceased told him that her parent's are poor and cannot pay so much money. In the kitchen of the house appellant poured kerosene over her person, set her on fire and left the house. At that time, P. W. 5 was in the gallery of her house. She saw the fire on ota (raised platform in front of the house) and called her husband. They saw the fire and the appellant leaving the house on motorbike. P. W. 6 was informed about the incident by her son ramesh. By the time she came to the ota of the house of the deceased, her daughter had doused the fire. P. W. 6 saw P. W. 5 at the gallery of her house and by frantic gestures, called her to come immediately. P. W. 4 and P. W. 5 came running to the scene of the occurrence. P. W. 4, who was ahead of his wife, asked his daughter about the cause. After she narrated the incident to him, P. W. 4 went to the kitchen where his daughter was set on fire. On her arrival mother also made queries which were answered by the deceased. The deceased was then taken to general Hospital, Hingoli. On her admission at about 9. 30 a. m. Medical Officer dr. Giri (P. W. 10) informed police officer deputed for duty at the hospital police chowki, that a patient with 95% burns is admitted to the hospital. On receipt of this information Head Constable Baburao Potwad (P. W. 9) went to the hospital. After verifying from Dr. Giri that the patient is in a fit mental condition to make a statement, he recorded statement of the deceased from 9. 45 to 10. 10 a. m. in presence of the medical officer and obtained endorsement of the medical officer on the dying declaration (Ex. 66). In this dying declaration the deceased stated that her husband was asking her to bring Rs. 1,00,000/- from her father since two months prior to the occurrence and was intermittently subjecting her to beating. On the day of incident, the demand was repeated. When deceased told him that it would not be possible for her father to make payment on that very day, her husband, poured kerosene on her, set her on fire and ran away. Laxmibai saw her and summoned her parents. She was then brought to the hospital. On the advice of the medical officer, the deceased was shifted to Civil Hospital at Nanded by her parents. On receipt of a wireless message from Hingoli. A. S. I. Kisan Bokhare (P. W. 14) attached to hospital police chowky at Nanded sent a requisition letter to special Judicial Magistrate for recording dying declaration of the deceased. In view of this request, Special Judicial Magistrate, Shri Tuptewar, (P. W. 13) approached medical officer Dr. Ibrahim Kothawale. The medical officer examined the patient and certified that the patient is in a fit mental state to make a statement P. W. 3 recorded the statement of the deceased during 1. 10 p. m. to 1. 25 p. m. (Ex. 40) in presence of the medical officer. He obtained endorsements of the medical officer regarding fitness of the deceased to make a statement at the beginning and at the end of the statement. In this statement same story is narrated by the deceased in brief. One copy of this statement was given to the Chief judicial Magistrate and one copy was forwarded to the investigating officer. In the meanwhile statement (Ex. 66) was sent to City Police Station. Offence punishable under section 307 and 498a, Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellant on the basis of this statement. P. I. Alsatwar took over the investigation and visited the spot. He attached burnt pieces of sari, broken pieces of mangalsutra, match box, two burnt match sticks, pieces of tiles and white shirt, under the Panchanama of the scene of occurrence (Ex. 34) in the presence of witnesses. He also seized note book (Article A) of the deceased produced by her father in which the deceased has made a memorandum of the beating given to her by the appellant on 25th June, 2003 and chit (Ex. 75/4) sent by her to her father on the day of the incident, under Panchanama (Ex. 35). The deceased expired on 3rd June, 2003. P. W. 14 held Inquest on the dead body (Ex. 31. ) and sent the dead body for post-mortem. Dr. Soni (P. W. 8) performed the post-mortem and prepared post-mortem report (Ex. 61). He noticed that the deceased had suffered 98% burns and opined that the cause of death is shock due to burns. The post mortem report and P. M. report were forwarded to the investigating officer. During the course of the investigation the note book, having specimen writing and the memoranda of the deceased and chit written by her were sent to the handwriting Expert. Handwriting Expert, Shri Parshuram Dhotre (P. W. 11) examined the writing and found that all the writing referred to him for examination is of the deceased. He thus, submitted expert opinion (Ex. 76) with reasons for the opinion (Ex. 77). On receipt of the report of Forensic Laboratory (Ex. 82) showing that all the articles except match box had tested positive for kerosene test, the appellant was charge-sheeted. At the trial fourteen witnesses were examined. The appellant adopted defence of total denial.