BHAGIRATHIBAI SURJI BHANUSHALI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment and order dated 30-11-1993, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 182 of 1987, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter :--

(2.) IN short, the prosecution case is as under :---The appellants Shambhulal Bhanushali and Himmatlal Bhanushali are real brothers. The appellant-Smt. Bhagirathibai Bhanushali is their mother. At the time of the incident, they were living in Bhanushali House, IIT Bazar Gate, Bombay-76. The deceased Dhanvanti was the daughter of Mithabai Bhanushali P. W. 3 and Valji Bhanushali. Prior to her marriage, she along with her parents and brother Kantilal P. W. 1 used to live in Ratandeep colony, Shastri Nagar, Bhandup, Bombay. Her brother Laxmidas, P. W. 2 used to reside in Jaliyan Apartments, Gupte Road, Dombivli (W.) in the District of Thane. On 17-5-1984, Dhanvanti was married to Shambhulal Bhanushali at Ghatkopar. At the time of the marriage, gold ornaments were demanded by the appellants and Surji Bhanushali, father of Shambhulal and Himmatlal and husband of Smt. Bhagirathibai. They were given by Dhanvantis parents. After the marriage, Dhanvanti started living with the appellants, at Bhanushali House, IIT Bazar Gate, Bombay-76. For one year, she was treated properly. Thereafter she gave birth to a daughter and the appellants and Surji Bhanushali started abusing and beating her. The appellants asked her to get a Steel Almirah from her parents and warned her that if the said demand was not fulfilled, she would be killed. Two months, thereafter the appellants started asking her to get a gold ear chain from her parents. From the evidence, it transpires that this was told by Dhanvanti to her brothers Kantilal, P. W. 1 and Laxmidas P. W. 2 and her mother Mithabai, P. W. 3 when she met them. Evidence of Kantilal and Laxmidas is that Dhanvanti told them that the appellants were demanding gold ear chain and were harassing and beating her to ensure that the said demand was met. Thereafter, the appellants are said to have made a monetary demand of Rs. 50,000/ -. They asked Dhanvanti to get the said amount from her parents, Kantilal, and others. Evidence of Kantilal and Mithabai is that Dhanvanti told them that in case the said demand was not fulfilled, they would kill her. Kantilal and others decided to fulfil the monetary demand to the tune of Rs. 20,000/ -. It is said that Dhanvantis father told the appellants that they were ready to pay Rs. 20,000/- It is alleged that on Rakshabandan day, the appellants did not allow Dhanvanti to visit her parents house. Evidence of Kantilal and Mithabai is that they received a message that Dhanvanti was admitted in Rajawadi Hospital and that of informant Laxmidas is that at about 10 p. m. he received a message from his father that Dhanvanti was admitted in Hospital. Accordingly, Kantilal, Laxmidas and Mithabai went to Rajawadi Hospital where they saw her dead body which was smelling of baygon spray. They found that froth was coming out from Dhanvantis mouth. Evidence of Mithabai is that when she enquired from the appellant-Shambhulal, as to how Dhanvanti had died, he replied that she had died of her own sinful act (Paap se Mar gayi ).

(3.) THE F. I. R. of the incident was lodged by Laxmidas, P. W. 2 at 8. 30 a. m. on 31-8-1986, at police station, Sakinaka. In the said F. I. R. , allegations of demand made by the appellants, and the cruelty meted out to Dhanvanti have been mentioned. On the basis of the F. I. R. , a case under sections 498-A, 306 and 114-A, Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellants.