VINOD RAMESH THORVE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused, who is a convict in Sessions Case No.165 of 2009 for the offences of murder and cruelty. By the impugned judgment and order dated 16.8.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, the appellant was sentenced under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer imprisonment for life and so also under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code to suffer R.I. for 3 years with fine.

(2.) Roopali, the wife of the appellant/accused No.1, died on 7.11.2008. The appellant is held guilty for murder of his wife Roopali who was killed on 7.11.2008.

(3.) One Gorakhnath Narayan Gangawane, the father of Roopali, is the informant. It is his case that his daughter Roopali got married with the appellant/accused approximately in the year 2006. However, the appellant/accused and his mother Shobha Ramesh Thorve both started demanding money from Roopali. Roopali on her visit to maiden home had told about the harassment at the hands of the appellant/accused. He gave Rs.20,000/- to the appellant and also requested that they should not harass his daughter. However, thereafter, Roopali used to complain that her mother in law abused and beat her. Her harassment had never stopped. The demand for money by the appellant and his mother continued thereafter. The appellant stopped working and so, the appellant alongwith two daughters, Roopali and his mother started residing in their village. The appellant and his mother both demanded Rs.1 lakh for constructing house which could not be fulfilled by PW1 Gorakhnath. On 30.10.2008, he was informed by his sister, PW5 Mangala Nagare, that she witnessed the appellant and his mother assaulting Roopali with kicks and fist blows out of the house. Then, on 6.11.2008, Gorakhnath received a message that his daughter Roopali was serious and so they should come to Pune. So, he went to Pune and found that she was admitted in Sassoon hospital and she had expired. He saw the dead body of Roopali and noticed injuries of beating and abrasions all over her body. So, the informant asked what happened and at that time, the appellant told that out of family dispute, he killed Roopali. The FIR (exh. 60) was registered at C.R. No.160 of 2008 under section 302, 498 r/w section 34 of the IPC, against the appellant and his mother. Inquest Panchanama was conducted by the Investigating Officer i.e., PW6 Narayan Bajirao Nanavare. Then, the death certificate (exh. 44) was collected, after post-mortem by the Investigating Officer (PW6). Spot panchanama was prepared on the same day, i.e., exh. 62. Then, the clothes of the Respondent were also seized under Panchanama (exh. 63). The clothes of the accused were seized under Panchanama (exh. 64). He recorded the statements of the witnesses and thereafter sent the articles to C.A. and after receiving C.A. report, which are exhibits 66 and 68, he prepared the chargesheet and filed it before the Court. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charge against the appellant and his mother and pleaded not guilty and adopted defence of denial.