RAJESHWAR MANIKRAO PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is convicted of the offences punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code for committing murder of his wife Rupali and young daughter Rachana and for an offence punishable under section 309, indian Penal Code for having committed an attempt to commit suicide, by Adhoc additional Sessions Judge, Latur. For the first offence, the appellant is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ -. For the second offence, he is sentenced to suffer SI for three months.

(2.) Before entering into the merits, we may notice few relevant facts. Appellant and his brother Sanjay are living separately from their father Manikrao patil at Chakur (District Latur). Appellant is serving as a clerk with Jagat Jagruti high School. He married Rupali daughter of Nirmala Warad of Latur in the year 1998. At the time of occurrence the appellant was living with his wife Rupali, 6 year old son Ritesh and 2 years old daughter Rachna. The family was living in a first floor flat of two storied shopping complex on the main road. Rupali was taking tuition of the boys for V to VII standard. She was earning four to five thousand rupees per month and was operating SB/ac with Bank of Hyderabad. Ritesh was attending first standard classes in Jagat Jagruti School. Two STD booths of Sanjay Patil were opposite the house of appellant across the road. These booths were manned by Sanjay (P. W. I) and Mahesh (P. W. 5). Shri Rajule had a painting shop near these STD booths. Dilip (P. W. 4) was serving as a painter in this shop. On 10th September, 2004, Ritesh went to the school as usual. At about 11. 00 o'clock in the morning, father of the appellant went to the shop of rajule and asked Dilip to go to the STD booth and telephone the appellant as nobody was responding to his call. Dilip conveyed the message to Sanjay who tried to contact the appellant on phone but there was no response. Thus, Dilip, sanjay and Mahesh went to the house of the appellant with Manikrao Patil and accosted the appellant. As there was no response, the boys forced the door open. After the door opened Manikrao and his wife Annapurna entered the house and started crying when they saw the appellant with injuries on his hands by the side of the dead bodies of Rupali and Rachna in the kitchen. Sanjay, Mahesh and dilip then entered the house. Somebody called Dr. Soni. He declared Rupali and rachna to be dead and advised that the appellant be shifted to the hospital. The appellant and Rachna were taken to the Rural Hospital, Chakur.

(3.) Dr. Kendre (P. W. 3) was on duty at the hospital. He treated four superficial injuries suffered by the appellant and informed the police. In response Head constable Sk. Mohiuddin (P. W. 8. ) visited the hospital. The appellant was dazed and could not make a statement. Mohiuddin took into his custody four envelopes and chits found in the shirt pocket of the appellant. P. I. Vinayak Mahanavar had been to village Kalkoti. On his return he received the information regarding the incident. He immediately went to the scene of occurrence; held inquest (Ex. 13) on the dead body of Rupali found in the kitchen and sent it to the hospital for autopsy. He then went to the hospital and held inquest (Ex. 14) on the dead body of Rachna. P. I. Mahanawar again returned to the spot. There was blood on the carpet in the drawing room, on the razor, muffler and on the floor of the kitchen. The investigating officer attached seven feet long piece of wire, piece of carpet, razor, muffler and sample of blood from the floor under panchanama (Ex. 21). On his return to the police station, the investigating officer attached envelopes and chits found in the shirt pocket of the appellant produced by Sk. Mohiuddin under seizure Memo (Ex. 37). Post-mortem reports (Ex. 25 and 27) of Rupali and rachana forwarded by the medical officer disclosed that both of them were throttled. The facts disclosed that the appellant had committed murder of his wife and daughter and made an attempt to commit suicide. Therefore, the investigating officer filed report (Ex. 39) on behalf of the State and registered offence against the appellant under sections 302 and 309 of the Penal Code. On completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant.