DADARAO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant who is the sole accused in Sessions Trial No. 88 of 1992 tried before the Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, was found guilty on 2nd September, 1993, by the learned trial Judge for the offences punishable under section 302 of I. P. C. for which he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default R. I. for three months, and for the offence punishable under section 376 of I. P. C. , and sentenced to suffer R. I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer R. I. for three months, substantive sentence to run concurrently.

(2.) THE appellant, at the material time i. e. on, 16th May, 1991, when the incident took place, was of 25 years of age. The incident is said to have taken place at the residential house of the appellant at village Eklara, the place 25 kms. away from the Police Station, Teleasaon Dashasar, District Amravati. At a shorter distance was the village Ghalkhad where there exists police outpost as could be seen from the information contained in the printed form of the F. I. R. Exh. 26 registered in this case. The scene of offence is, thus, in the residential house of the complainant Babarao son of Gomaji who lived in the house along with his father Gomaji, three brothers including the appellant Dadarao. His married sister Ratnakala (P. W. 2) had also come to reside with them because of the marriage of the appellant Dadaro, which was then settled. Accused Dadarao was said to be not moving out as he was the prospective bride-groom. On this background of the family circumstances, incident is alleged to have taken place on May 16th 1991, some time between 5 p. m. to 6 p. m. On that day it was alleged, that the complainant Babarao had gone out for his work to the nearby village Ghulkhed from where he returned by about 6 p. m. While entering his house he noticed his brother, the appellant, going out of the house and getting the door of the house closed from outside. The complainant Babarao entered the house. He gave calls in the name of his wife Kamal. Babarao was married to Kamal in 1987. Kamal had two children. He noticed that in the room of the house Kamal was lying on the ground. Full pant belonging to the appellant was wrapped round her face. A nylon string was tied to the country roof of the house by its one end, whereas the other end turned into loop was round the neck of the deceased Kamalabai. Her saree was untied and kept aside. Her petticoat appeared raised up, There were semen like stains by her side. Frightened by the said scene, Babarao raised shouts. He caught hold of accused, the brother. His father and sister Ratnakala who had been to the field on the outskirt of the village, listening to the shouts of Babarao, also came there. People also gathered, On securing information regarding the ghastly incident in which Babaraos wife was seen dead, Babarao made certain enquiries, He learnt that it was accused Dadarao who had committed rape on Kamalabai and then by pressing her neck killed her. Leaving the accused to the care of neighbouring persons, he went to the Police Station and lodged his report Exh. 18 in the Police Station in which he reported that his younger brother Dadarao committed rape and murdered Kamalabai, On the background of this, offence was registered which was investigated by P. W 7- Head Constable Ramkhilavan Dubey, who appeared to have become Assistant Sub-Inspector by the time the trial of the offences took place. During the investigation, it transpired that the appellant made extra judicial confession before the complainant and the witnesses. The witness like P. W. 2 Ratnakala, P. W. 3 Shriram and P. W. 4 Ramrao were the persons before whom, the appellant was alleged to have confessed his guilt. After taking the usual steps of doing the spot panchanama, the inquest panchanama, getting the dead body examined from the doctor and after recording the statements of witnesses, charge sheet alleging the offences under section 376 and 302 of I. P. C. was filed against the accused. The post-mortem report was said to have noted abrasion on the left cheek of the deceased, of the size 1" x 1", another abrasion on the right wrist joint 1/2" x 1/2", tracheal cartilage congested and the thumb as well as index finger impressions on the throat of the deceased due to heavy pressure. The cause of death in opinion of the doctor, was asphyxia due to throatling.

(3.) ON the background of the investigation and the offences complained against the appellant, the learned trial Judge put the appellant on trial for two offences punishable under section 376 I. P. C. and 302 I. P. C. The defence of the accused was of denial of the charges against him and his false involvement. The stand taken by him was that his brother Babarao was suspecting him to have developed illicit intimacy with deceased Kamal, that he as well as the deceased were doing work in their field. Complainant used to beat both of them. The complainant had even reached Kamal to her parents house because of such suspicion. Ratnakala was afraid of the complainant. The witnesses, who rose to give evidence against the appellant, were close to Babarao. It was on account of all these aspects the appellant came to be falsely involved in this case at the instance of Babarao.