STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. MESU DHONDIBA VIDHATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this appeal, the State of Maharashtra (Appellant) challenges the judgment and order dated 30-11-1984 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 129 of 1984, acquitting the respondent for an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC.

(2.) IN short, the prosecution case is that the deceased Shashikala, daughter of Dagadu Anyaba Kamble PW 1, was married to the respondent about 9 to 10 months prior to the incident. After marriage, she stayed for a couple of months at the house of the respondent situated in Indira Nagar Zopadpatti Pune-Alandi Road, Pune. During Diwali, she came to the house of her father. Mter Diwali, her father sent through her some clothes to the respondent. The respondent came to him and threw those clothes. Shashikala expected that the respondent would beat her. Consequently, Dagadu Kamble brought her to his place at Khed. After she was with him for a week there, the respondent along with his father Dhondiba came and both of them apologised to Dagadu promising that they would not ill-treat Shashikala. Consequently, Dagadu sent her with them. Thereafter, Dagadu Kamble came to Indira Nagar Zopadpatti where the respondent was residing and started staying there in a hut situated about 100 feet from the respondents hut. On 28-3-1984 at about 8 p. m. Shashikala came to her father's hut and told him that when she asked the respondent not to gamble, he inflicted fist blows on her stomach and threw away the cooked food. Consequently, Dagadu Kamble along with Shashikala came to the house of the respondent and protested. On that the latter replied that he would continue gambling and his only obligation was to provide Shashikala with food and clothing. Dagadu Kamble returned to his hut thereafter. As soon as he had reached his hut, an old woman by the name of Parvatibai came and informed him that the respondent had burnt Shashikala and their hut was burning. On that Dagadu rushed, to Shashikalas house along with his sister Hirabai Mhaske PW 2 where he saw the respondent standing just near the hut, the entrance door of which was chained with a chain from outside. When he peeped into the hut, he saw Shashikala lying on the ground in a burnt condition. He called her by name and she informed him that the respondent had inflicted fist blows on her stomach and thereafter poured kerosene oil on her person, and set fire to her sari with a kerosene lamp. Consequently, he lifted Shashikala and along with his sister Hirabai PW 2 and one Vitthal Ballal, the immediate neighbour of Shashikala, took her in a rickshaw to Sasoon Hospital where she was admitted in Ward No. 27 (Burns Ward ). It is said that while on way, to Sasoon Hospital Shashikala was shouting that kerosene had been poured on her and she had been set to fire.

(3.) EVIDENCE of Dr. Sahebrao Savale PW 5 shows that at. 8. 45 p. m. on 28-3-1984, Shashikala was admitted at Sasoon Hospital, Pune. On examining her, he found that she had sustained 100 % burns. At the time of examination, he found that she was fully conscious and well oriented. He asked her the history of the burns, and incorporated her reply in his hand-writing in the medical case papers Exhibit 19. The relevant part of Exhibit 19 reads thus: 28-3-1984 Informant patient herself alleged H/o Homicidal burns today 9. 45 p. m. at about 8. 00 p. m. at home. Pt. had quarrel with her husband today evening (Her husband is a gambler ). Pt. told him not to gamble. He had angry with her. He had quarrel with her. He told her that she should keep quiet or he will set her on fire. She did not listen. So he poured kerosene on her and set her on fire with a lamp and the patient got extensive deep burns. Patient's father-in-law was also present at home at the time of incident. He was also taking part in quarrel. When patient was set on fire, none of them tried to extinguish the fire. Patient yelled out for help and few neighbours and patients relatives came to her home and poured water on her. But it was too late. Patient got extensive deep burns. Immediately, patient was brought to S. G. H. by patients father and other relatives. Family H - Married 9 months back living with husband. Husband does not do any particular job. He is a regular gambler. Patient didn't like him gambling. Since marriage they had quarrel off and on. Ultimately, it led to homicide. 4 days back the couple was living with other relatives i. e. mother in-law, father-in-law and their children and with her husband. 4 days back they had quarrel and they got separated and started living separately in single room Zopadi near the parents. Here also the couple had repeated quarrels. Obsta H. Married 9 months back. Since marriage husband and wife had repeated quarrels.