SHRISHAIL BHIMSHA GHALE Vs. STATE OF MAHRASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises from the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned IInd Addl. Sessions Judge at Solapur on 23/11/1990 in Sessions Case No.115 of 1990 and for the offences punishable under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 201 read with Section 34 of IPC. On the first charge the accused no.1 has been sentenced to suffer RI for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-whereas accused nos.2 and 3 have been sentenced to suffer RI for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-. For the second charge all the accused have been sentenced to suffer RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-. All the accused have also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC. However, no separate sentence has been awarded in view of the sentences already awarded as above. The substantive sentences have been directed to run concurrently. All the accused are held to be entitled to set off for the period of detention already undergone by each of them, if any. It appears, during the trial the accused were released on bail and they were also granted bail by this Court as per the order dated 5/12/1990. The accused were acquitted from the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.

(2.) As per the prosecution case Mahadeo Mali, resident of village Mulegaon gave his daughter Shevanta in marriage to the accused no.1, the son of the accused nos.2 and 3 and resident of village Mandrup and the marriage was performed on 17/5/1989 at village Mandrup. He had agreed to give a dowry of Rs.4000/-and out of the same he agreed to pay an amount of Rs.3000/-at the time of marriage and the remaining amount of Rs.1000/-and cot and mattress be given after marriage and accordingly he had paid the amount of Rs.3000/-. Shevanta was renamed in her matrimonial home as Surekha. She was being harassed and ill-treated on the demand of remaining amount of Rs.1000/-and the other articles as promised during marriage. Within eight days of marriage she was brought back to her parents' house and was informed by her mother-in-law that she must return with the remaining amount and the articles as promised. On 3/8/1989 Somling Malleshi Ghale -PW 10 and cousin of the accused no.1 went to village Mulegaon and informed Surekha's mother at about 12-30 noon that Surekha died suddenly while cooking. Surekha's parents, brothers and other relations reached village Mandrup between 3 to 4 p.m. They saw that the dead body was kept in the inner room which was dark. Around 5 p.m. the dead body was taken out for cremation and at the cremation ground the relations of the deceased objected on the ground that in their community (Mali) the dead bodies are buried and they are not cremated. The residents of village Mandrup who were present at the crematorium and the accused insisted that the deceased would be cremated and at this stage the mother of the deceased Sonabai and her aunt Dhulabai insisted to see at least the face of the deceased but this was avoided. However, these two ladies went ahead and removed the saree from the face of the deceased and noticed that around the neck of the deceased there were injury marks. The persons from Mandrup village returned from the crematorium and the dead body was not cremated. Revansidha son of Mahadev Mali -PW 3 and the brother of the deceased went to Mandrup Police Station and lodged the complaint which came to be registered as an FIR (Exh.19). CR No.22/89 came to be registered by Damodhar Gangaram Gaikwad, PSI -PW 11. He went to the cremation ground and held the inquest panchanama (Exh.17). He was told that it was the dead body of Surekha Ghale. Firewood and seized articles were recorded in the panchanama at Exhibit 10 and on the next day the accused were arrested. PSI Gaikwad took over the investigation, sent the dead body for post mortem, to Dr. V.M.Medical College, Civil Hospital, Solapur. Dr.S.S.Sardar, Lecturer in Forensic Medicine conducted the post-mortem on 4/8/1989 between 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. and filled in the post mortem report at Exhibit 27 certifying the cause of death as "asphyxia as a result of strangulation". On completion of investigation the charge-sheet was filed and charge was framed on committal of the case on 29/10/1990. All the accused pleaded not guilty and took the defence of alibi i.e they were not present in the house when Surekha died on 3/8/1989.

(3.) As per the charge framed on 29/10/1990 the accused were charged for the offences punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC, Section 304-B read with Section 34 of IPC and in the alternate under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 201 read with Section 34 of IPC. . The prosecution examined eleven witnesses i.e. PW 1 -Dr.Shivaji Shah, PW 2 -Kashibai Mhetre, PW 3 -Revansidha Mali, PW 4 -Gangadhar Gaikwad, PW 5 Dr.S.S. Sardar, PW 6 -Daji Jadhav, PW 7 -Police Constable Machindra Laxman Kurle, PW 8 -Dhulabai Babusha Mali, PW 9 -Subhash Jodmote, PW 10 -Somling Ghale and PW 11 - Damodhar Gaikwad. The defence also examined one witness i.e. Malsidha Jodmote - DW 1.