SHYAMRAO KHANDU SONAWANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused herein was charged for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It was the case of the prosecution that on 31st January, 1999 at about 5.00 P.M the accused threw a match stick on the deceased Lata, his wife thereby setting her on fire which resulted in 80 to 85 percent burn injuries. Lata expired the next week. THE learned Trial Court after considering the evidence which was led by the prosecution including the evidence of the two brothers of the deceased, one sister also the evidence of S.E.O (P.W.3) who recorded Dying Declaration of the deceased. Dying Declaration recorded by the I.O as also Oral Dying Declarations to the two brothers and sister was pleased to convict the accused of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Relying on the evidence of P.W.1 Pushpa Vinod Sai, who was sister as also of P.W.2 Ramesh Khandu Tuplondhe and P.W.4 Uttam Khandu Tuplondhe the brothers convicted the accused also for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. THE learned Trial Court was pleased to sentence the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.15,000/- in default to suffer R.I for one year and for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code sentenced the accused to suffer R.I for three years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- in default to suffer further R.I for six months.

(2.) AT the hearing of this appeal on behalf of the appellant the learned counsel submits that there was no evidence on record to sustain the conviction under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. In so far as the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, it is also submitted that the prosecution has been unable to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, considering the evidence of the witnesses examined and as such, the appellant should be acquitted of both the charges.

(3.) FROM the evidence of P.W.2 and P.W.4 it would be clear that one is staying at Chembur and the other Ambarnath, Mumbai. The case of both the brothers is that after the assault she used to come to their house. This assault as deposed is an improvement from the deposition of the sister Pushpa who was staying about 12 rooms away from the husband of the accused and the deceased and who would be the first person the deceased would have confident in. In our opinion, considering that no complaint was lodged by the deceased through out the 16 years of marriage with the police either by her and or by her brothers the case does not come within the required predicates of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. In our opinion, therefore, there was no sufficient record for the learned Judge to convict the accused for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. We, therefore, set aside the conviction under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.