ASHRUBA GENA GITE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20-1-1994 in a case of dowry death. The first appellant is the husband of deceased Indubai. The second appellant is the mother of the appellant No. 1. They were tried for offence punishable under sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court convicted both the appellants and sentenced each of them to undergo R. I. for two years under section 498-A of the I. P. C. and further R. I. for seven years under section 304-B of the I. P. C.

(2.) IN order to appreciate the complicity of the accused in respect of the crime in question, it is necessary to consider few relevant facts, which have resulted in prosecution of the appellants for the offences charged. The marriage between appellant No. 1 and deceased Indubai took place on 4-3-1991. P. W. 3 Hanuman, who is a brother of deceased Indubai spent Rs. 10,000/- as a dowry in the marriage. Soon after the marriage, deceased Indubai went to her matrimonial home but she had twice visited her mothers place at Kharda for festivals, such as Ashadh and Nag-panchami. It was alleged that during her stay with her mother P. W. 5 Janabai, deceased Indubai disclosed to her mother as well as to her brother P. W. 3 Hanuman that the appellants were asking her to bring Rs. 14,000/- to satisfy the repayment of the amount raised on loan for the purpose of marriage of appellant No. 1. It was further disclosed that on that account Indubai was subjected to cruelty, in the sense that she was beaten by the appellant No. 1 and that she was not given proper food.

(3.) THE prosecution version is that P. W. 5 Janabai as well as her son P. W. 3 Hanuman advised Indubai to tell the appellants that they have already spent some amount for the marriage and it would be not possible for them to meet with the demand soon, but they would pay the amount subsequently. On such promise, Indubai was sent to her matrimonial home whenever she had visited her mothers place.