LILABAI RAMCHANDRA KOKATE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants challenge their conviction for the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 302 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, for which they have been sentenced to undergo R. I. for 3 years and Life Imprisonment for life, besides fine, respectively in Sessions Trial No. 193/1992, decided by the Sessions Judge, Akola by his judgment dated 30-9-1993.

(2.) Facts leading to the prosecution of the appellants were that P. W. 1 Suman mohan Ingale is mother of deceased Rajkanya who had married to one Suresh Mahore the brother of the husband of appellant no. 2. Appellants are mother and daughter in relation. Deceased Rajkanya was the issue begotten from the first husband of P. W. 1 Suman. The name of her first husband was Shaligram Tale. She could not pull on well with him, so she deserted him and remarried with one Mohan Ingale. Rajkanya was also residing prior to her marriage with them at Sindhi Camp, Akola. Suman had no other issue from her second husband Mohan. It is also necessary to mention that it is the case of the prosecution that deceased Rajkanya had initially married with one Nashikrao madhusudan Vairale about 4-5 years back. But because of ill-treatment by him, she deserted him and remarried with Suresh the brother of gajanan Mahore, the husband of appellant no. 2. This Suresh and Gajanan were residing with said rajkanya and appellant no. 2 Sau. Sangita, respectively, in the adjoining rooms in village chandur which is situated at a distance of 1 - 1 1/2 k. m. from Akola. The mother of these brothers Shantabai was residing with Rajkanya and Suresh. Sunita was the first daughter of appellant no. 1 and elder sister of appellant no. 2 who had initially married with Suresh. But as she could not live happily with him, there was divorce between them ad this Sunita thereafter remarried. Deceased Rajkanya had earlier husband living but she had remarried with suresh, whereas the first wife of Suresh Sunita had performed other marriage leaving him. It is necessary to note that after marriage of rajkanya and Suresh, there was marriage between sister of Sangita i. e. appellant no. 2 with gajanan. It is alleged that marriage between rajkanya and Suresh took place on 22-5-1991, whereas marriage between appellant no. 2 sangita and Gajanan had taken place on 23-5-1991. It is alleged that, this Gajanan thereafter brought Sunita at the house of Suresh and therefore, deceased Rajkanya had asked her mother P. W. 1 Suman as to whether there was valid divorce between the said Suresh and sunita. She informed that she had seen divorce deed. Thereafter, it is alleged; both the appellants started ill-treating the said Rajkanya, perhaps on the ground, that Sunita could not pull on well with Suresh and his married life was good with deceased Rajkanya. It is alleged that they used to pass sarcastic remarks against rajkanya. It is also a case of the prosecution that P. W. 1 Suman, her second husband Mohan and deceased Rajkanya were involved in a murder of one Shila daughter of Namdeorao ghogre which took place on 22-12-1989 and they were being prosecuted in Sessions Trial no. 41/1991. It is the case of the prosecution that Suresh was not informed about the pending prosecution for the serious offence against deceased Rajkanya. The incident in question had taken place on 14-9-1991 and therefore, the trial against deceased Rajkanya abated. It may be noted that in that case Mohan was acquitted, whereas P. W. 1 Suman was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(3.) Turning to this case, it is alleged that the appellants were visiting the house of gajanan and they used to pick up quarrels with deceased Rajkanya which caused mental torture to her. It is alleged that earlier when P. W. 1 suman and her husband Mohan had visited the house of Rajkanya, she complained about both the accused and made a grievance that they were picking up quarrels with her and causing harassment to her. It is further alleged that p. W. 1 Suman had decided to take her daughter deceased - Rajkanya back, but Suresh intervened and told that Rajkanya should not be taken back. On the date of the incident on the issue of taking water from the common water tap in the courtyard there was quarrel. The time was about 2. 00 p. m. when both Suresh and Gajanan had gone to work as Labourers in the field. Shantabai was there. She had objected both the accused. Deceased Rajkanya intervened and asked both the accused not to quarrel with Shantabai who was elderly woman. It is alleged that there was scuffle between the appellants on one side and the deceased rajkanya on the other. It is the case of the prosecution further that the appellants pushed rajkanya into her house and poured kerosene on her person and set her ablaze. Rajkanya sustained 100% burns and thereafter, she was taken to Main Hospital, Akola from Chandur. Gajanan and Suresh were called and then gajanan informed P. W. 1 Suman that Rajkanya was burnt and she was admitted in Main hospital, Akola. She was treated there. It is alleged that deceased Rajkanya made a dying declaration to P. W. 1 Suman orally, saying that both the appellants picked up quarrels with her. They pushed her in the house and poured kerosene on her person and set her on fire. She also told that Shantabai was present there, she in order to avoid untoward incident picked up the matchbox and ran away from the house, however, somehow appellant secured another match stick and set her on fire. The Police constable who was present at the outpost in the General Hospital, Akola, gave telephonic message to Civil Lines Police Station, regarding admission of deceased Rajkanya and requested him to arrange for recording of dying declaration. Some time thereafter, P. W. 2 executive Magistrate-Upadhye came there on receipt of the requisition and recorded dying declaration of the deceased Rajkanya as per exh. 24. It may be stated that it is the case of the prosecution that P. W. 3 Gulabrao Kapate, who was familiar with the husband of P. W. 1 suman had been the witness to the disclosure of ill-treatment by deceased Rajkanya. He had also come to hospital. P. W. 4 Dr. Ranjit Patil is said to have given fitness certificate of the deceased for making dying declaration to P. W. 2 Upadhye and also on recording the statement. Offence under sections 307, 498-A read with section 34 of I. P. C. was registered against appellants. P. W. 6 P. S. I. Totawar registered crime after recording statement. He went to spot to prepare spot panchanama Ex. 28 which was prepared in presence of P. W. 5 Bhaurao bawne. Some articles were seized from the spot as per Ex. 29. Thereafter, the said Rajkanya died. As such offence was converted into section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian penal Code. Inquest Panchanama was prepared as per Ex. 31. P. M. report was received Ex. 33. Thus, it is alleged that the appellants who are mother and daughter had ill-treated and caused harassment to deceased Rajkanya the second wife of Suresh and at the relevant time they had set her on fire and because of burn injuries to the extent of 100%, she succumbed on following day in the morning. After due investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellants and as the offences were triable exclusively by the court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, akola.