SUNIL JAYWANT KASHIKSR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal takes exception to the Judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay dated november 19, 2004 in Sessions Case No. 942 of 1999. The appellant/accused has been convicted of the offence punishable under section 307 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R. I. for six years. In addition, the appellant/accused was ordered to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 Lakhs to the complainant-Aparna Anil Prabhu and in default to suffer R. I. for one year.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that one Aparna Anil Prabhu was residing in room No. 8, Haral Kutir Building, Chincholi Bunder Road, Malad (West), Mumbai. After completing her graduation in the year 1988, she started serving in a private marketing company. It is stated that the appellant/accused was residing in front of residential house of said Aparna Prabhu, in one chawl. According to the prosecution, when said Aparna Prabhu was in the 10th standard, she used to attend one tuition class where the accused used to eve tease her. She had complained about that to her parents. The parents of the complainant in turn had contacted the teacher of the said tuition class; and all of them approached the parents of the accused complaining about his conduct. Thereafter, eve teasing had stopped. It is the prosecution case that however, when accused used to see the complainant Aparna he simply used to follow her. There was no complaint about any untoward situation reported till the incident in question. It is the prosecution case that when complainant-Aparna Prabhu was on her duty on 10th March, 1999, she received a telephonic call from the accused requesting her to marry him. On hearing that request, Aparna banged the phone. Once again Aparna received another telephone call in succession, when she again banged the telephone. It is stated that on llth March, 1999 when Aparna left her house for office and when she was walking towards office, on her way she met the accused on the road before the office. The accused requested her (Aparna) to marry him. When Aparna did not pay any heed and proceeded further towards her office, the accused threatened her that he will kill her and later on would commit suicide. It is stated that soon the accused removed one can from yeliow coloured plastic bag and poured the contents on the person of Aparna. As a result of which Aparna received serious burn injuries. Her clothes were torn and the fumes started coming from the clothes and her body. The complainant realised that the liquid poured on her was nothing but acid. She immediately rushed towards her office screaming; and on entering the office, she poured water on her person and requested her colleagues to immediately take her to hospital. Her colleagues rushed her to Bhabha Hospital. On receiving intimation from the hospital, police reached the hospital and recorded the complaint Exh. 11. The complaint was reduced into writing and registered as C. R. No. 106/1999 for offence under section 307 of Indian Penal Code. Besides recording the complaint, the police seized clothes which were worn by the complainant at the relevant time under panchanama Exh. 24. The clothes were sent to Chemical analyser. The police also carried out panchanama of scene of offence Exh. 25.

(3.) IT is the prosecution case that the appellant/accused was also admitted in same hospital with history of attempt to commit suicide by consuming insecticide known as fenitrophion (New TIK-20 ). After completing investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed against the appellant for offence under section 307 of indian Penal Code. The appellant denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined in all nine witnesses in support of its case. Besides, prosecution relied on the documentary evidence.