STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. KISHOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-state, seeks to challenge the judgment passed by the additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Trial No.101/1989 by which, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chadrapur acquitted the respondents for the offences punishable under section 498-A and 302, read with sec. 34 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Case of the prosecution is that the deceased -Vanita was the wife of respondent no.1 -accused-Kishor. Respondent no.2 -accused - Bharat is his brother, respondent no.3 and 4 -accused are his parents. It is alleged that the marriage between the deceased and respondent - Kishor was solemnized in November, 1986. After the marriage deceased -Vanita had come to reside with her husband [matrimonial home] at Chandrapur. It is alleged that all these respondents / accused were residing together. After about 1 months deceased -Vanita was taken by her parents to Jabalpur. Thereafter, again she was brought to Chandrapur. She resided there with respondents for about 4 to 5 months. Thereafter, again she was taken to Jabalpur, she lived there for a considerable time. It is alleged that at this time, respondent no.2-accused Bharat had brought her to Jabalpur. On enquiry deceased Vanita told her father that accused persons used to beat her on flimsy grounds. Further, respondent no.4 -accused Shantabai used to say that her son -accused no.1 would have received 60 Tolas of Gold from others; had he performed marriage with other girl. It is alleged that on demand of some ornaments; all the respondents accused were ill-treating her. It is further alleged that when the deceased Vanita had come to reside with the respondents, after some time, when her suitcase was checked one black thread was noticed. It was therefore, suspected that the deceased Vanita was doing some witchcraft on the respondents -accused. Therefore, again she was left at her parents home at Jabalpur. During her stay at Jabalpur with her parents, she had filed petition for judicial separation in the court at Jabalpur, which was compromised and later on she again came to reside at her matrimonial home. During her stay at Jabalpur she had completed her LL.B. and had started practicing as an advocate in the courts at Jabalpur. When she was living in her matrimonial house at Chandrapur, deceased Vanita, it is alleged, was not allowed to write a letter to her parents. They used to beat her. Later on she suffered burn injuries on 26.5.1988 in the morning. She was taken to General Hospital Chandrapur, however, she succumbed to the said injuries on the same day at about 3.15 p.m. The information about her death was given by Head Constable Pandhari to the City Police Station, Chandrapur, whereupon A.D. No.40/88 was registered. on 27.5.1988, the father of the deceased -Purushottamlal who had rushed to Chandrapur suspected that the respondents -accused must have burnt the deceased, so he lodged report against the respondents -accused. Accordingly, Crime no.216/1988 was registered against the respondents. After due investigation, respondents were chargesheeted for the aforesaid offences and in turn were tried in the aforesaid trial vide Sessions Trial No.101/1989 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur.

(3.) During the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charge for the offence punishable under sec. 498-A, 302, read with sec. 34 of I.P.C. It was explained to the respondents. They pleaded not guilty to the same. Their defence is that of total denial.