NAMDEO HULBA PANCHARE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to judgment rendered by learned Sessions Judge, Biloli, in Sessions Case No.53/1993. By the impugned judgment, appellants named hereinabove have been convicted for offence U/s 498-A read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and for offence U/s 306 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. They have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three (3) years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand), in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for nine (9) months and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five (5) years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand), in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for fifteen (15) months by each of them, respectively, on the above two counts.

(2.) UNDISPUTEDLY, about 10 (ten) months prior to the incident of her death, marriage of deceased Shakuntalabai was performed with appellant No.1 Namdeo. Appellant Nos.2 to 7 are his relatives being parents, brothers, sister-in-law and her father. At the relevant time, appellant Nos. 1 to 6 were residing at village Loni (District Nanded). The parental house of deceased Shakuntala is at village Bangarpalli Taluka Madnoor (A.P.). Both the villages are at short distance from each other though are in different States. For, Nanded District in Maharashtra is adjacent to Nizamabad District in Andhra Pradesh. There is no dispute about the fact that deceased Shakuntala left the matrimonial house in the evening of 18.1.1992. Her dead body was found in a well situated in the agricultural land of one Shri Jangam at village Loni. She died due to drowning. Her brother (P.W.3 Maroti) lodged F.I.R. (Exh.58) on the same day.

(3.) AT trial, prosecution examined in all six (6) witnesses in support of its case. The learned Sessions Judge held that harassment of deceased Shakuntala, due to non-fulfillment of unlawful demand is duly proved. He further held that the deceased committed suicide by jumping in the well as a result of unbearable cruelty caused to her by the appellants. He held that the appellants abetted commission of her suicide by their lawful conduct. Consequently, the appellants were convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable U/s 298-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.