SHRICHAND UTTAMCHAND BHATIA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred the appeal against the judgment and order of the II Ad hoc Additional Sessions judge, Kalyan dated 7-6-2003. By this judgment and order, the appellant who was accused No. 1 before the Sessions Court has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and payment of fine of Rs. 3000/ -. The appellant has been acquitted of the offence punishable under sections 498a and 304-B read with section 34 of the Indian penal Code. Accused No. 2, the brother of the appellant and accused No. 3, the mother of accused Nos. 1 and 2, have been acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 498a and 304-B read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the victim Maya and the appellant were married on 8-2-1988. Their marriage was arranged by Maya's brother, madhav. According to the prosecution, accused No. 2 in this case i. e. , Nandlal, the brother of the appellant had an altercation with Madhav at the wedding reception of Maya and the appellant because Madhav had not paid an amount of rs. 500/- for certain expenses at the wedding. The appellant's brother had threatened Madhav with dire consequences if the amount remained unpaid. According to the prosecution, on the night intervening between 9-5-1988 and 10-5-1988, the victim was throttled to death by the appellant. The complainant who is the victim's brother was informed of his sister's death by Madhav and the appellant's brother in the morning of 10-5-1988. After rushing to the victim's matrimonial home along with other members of his family, the complainant lodged a complaint with the police since he suspected foul play. The prosecution alleges that ligature marks around the neck of the deceased were covered with some red medicine. Post-mortem examination was performed on the victim's body and the Doctor opined that the death had occurred due to asphyxia on throttling. The appellant, his brother, Nandlal and his mother were arrested and arraigned for having committed offences punishable under sections 498a read with 34, 302 read with 34 and 304-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The sessions Court, Kalyan has acquitted the brother and the mother of the appellant of all the charges and has convicted the appellant under section 302 while acquitting him of the other charges.

(3.) The next witness examined by the prosecution is Madhav, another brother of the victim. He has corroborated the evidence of the complainant regarding the demand for money made by Nandlal. Maya had visited him about 3 to 4 times after the marriage. She had spoken about the appellant disliking her and harassing her for money. According to this witness, he was informed of maya's death between 6 and 7 a. m. on 10-5-1988 by appellant's brother Ashok. He has stated that he reached the victim's house at about 8. 30 a. m. with his brother, mother and other members of his family. This witness has also spoken about having observed some red medicine on the neck of the deceased and that there was froth near her mouth. He has, therefore, corroborated the testimony of the complainant.