INDUBHAI BHIMA SAKAT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Counsel for the Appellant - Original Accused No. 2 and learned APP for the Respondents - State.

(2.) Three ladies were prosecuted for offences under Section 307, 302 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. for burning alive deceased Bhagabai. The trial court acquitted accused Nos. 1 and 3 and convicted only the present appellant - original Accused No.2 under Section 302 of I.P.C. and therefore this Appeal.

(3.) It is the prosecution case that the accused and the deceased were living in a zopadpatti. The incident occurred on 18.2.1988. There is no eye witness to the incident. FIR is lodged by Kisan Ganpat Ragpasare, the husband of deceased Bhagabai, Exhibit '23' which could not be proved by the prosecution as the complainant Kisan has expired. P.W. 7 Bapurao Vithoba Bhat, PSI, has also stated in his evidence before the court that he had come to know that Kisan expired and thereafter he submitted chargesheet. However, since the prosecution case begins with FIR only for that purpose we are going through the FIR. Kisan in the FIR has stated that he used to reside at Anandnagar Zopadpatti, Chinchwad, Pune, with his wife Bhagabai, two sons - Dattatraya and Vilas, and daughters Sunita and Sumitra. Bhagabai was serving as sweeper in Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation and he used to do the work of shaving of buffaloes. In front of his house his brother in law Bhau Shivram Londhe with his wife Gitabai and daughters Indubai Bhima Saket (Appellant - original accused No.2 is the said Indubai). He has also stated that there used to be a quarrel between them over water tap and between children, but there were no complaint in that regard as they were relatives.