NITIN BHAGWANRAO PAIJANWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellants challenge the judgment and order of conviction and sentence rendered by Adhoc additional Sessions Judge, Washim, in Sessions trial No. 78/2005, wherein the appellants were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 306 r/w Section 34 of the I. P. C. The appellants were found guilty by the learned additional Sessions Judge of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the I. P. C. Accordingly, they were convicted and sentenced to R. I. for two years and seven years respectively, besides fine.

(2.) Facts leading to the prosecution of the present appellants as alleged by the prosecution are thus; the marriage of deceased Pratibha had taken place with appellant No. 1 Nitin in the year 2003 as per the traditions and custom of the parties. Appellant No. 2 is the father of appellant No. 1, whereas the other appellants are the close relatives of Appellant No. l, the husband of the deceased. Their relations are; appellant No. 2 is the father, appellant No. 3 is the brother-in-law, appellant No. 4 is the mother and appellant No. 5 and 6 are respectively sisters of appellant No. 1. It is alleged that all of them were subjecting deceased Pratibha to mental and physical cruelty and harassment. It was alleged that at the time of Diwali prior to the death of the said Pratibha, she had disclosed that her husband was demanding Rs. 50. 000/- and as such the appellants were ill-treating her. It is alleged that on 26-4-2005 deceased Pratibha had accompanied with her brother Prakash to walure for attending the marriage of her father's niece scheduled on 1-5-2005. It is alleged that, at that time the said Pratibha had disclosed about the ill-treatment on account of demand of rs. 50,000/ -. It is also alleged that she had told that there was danger to her life, if the demand is not met. It is further alleged that on 1-5-2005 appellant no. 1 had gone to Walure to attend the said marriage. Immediately after the marriage, he took deceased Pratibha to Washim. On 5-5-2005 at about 4 p. m. , the message was received on telephone at the house of uncle of Pratibha whereby they were informed that Pratibha had suffered burn injuries and her condition was serious. Parents of the deceased Pratibha were called by that message. It was also informed that she was admitted in Reynold Hospital, washim and also that she had set herself on fire. On the same day, parents of the deceased went to Reynold Hospital, Washim. They reached there at about 7. 30 p. m. They noticed Pratibha in burnt condition having been admitted in the hospital. It is alleged that on arrival of the parents, deceased Pratibha had wept and stated that she was set ablaze by all. It is alleged that she could not speak any more and later on she expired at about 11 p. m. It may be mentioned that it is the case of the prosecution that when she was admitted in Reynold Hospital, Washim, the Hospital authorities had reported about her admission to the police on 5-5-2005 at about 4. 30 p. m. On that basis, police took a note in the station diary at Sr. No. 43 of 2005. Thereafter again on the death of said Pratibha, it was informed to the Police that she had expired and on that basis, A. D. No. 17/05 was registered on 6-5-2005 at about 0. 50 a. m. It was mentioned that deceased had suffered 90% burns. Thereafter the dead body was referred to Civil hospital, Washim for autopsy by issuing letter. On post-mortem, the dead body was handed over to the accused persons. During the course of investigation of A. D. , police had visited the spot of incident, the spot panchnama was prepared. Inquest panchnama was also prepared. All other necessary formalities were completed. After funeral, the father of the deceased PW-1 Gulab Babulal Gokanwar lodged report to the police station about the alleged harassment and committing of suicide by the deceased. The offence under Section 498-A and 306 r/w Section 34 of the I. P. C. bearing Crime No. 176/05 was registered. Again investigation was proceeded. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and after due investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted against all the appellants.

(3.) As stated above, the defence of the appellants is that the deceased had suffered accidental fire while she was boiling the milk. The demand of money of Rs. 50,000/- as well as consequent ill-treatment for meeting out that demand has been denied.