STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. MADHUSUDAN N. MATALIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated 09 th October 1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 1284 of 1992 acquitting the Respondent (Orig. Accused) for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is as under:

(3.) Learned APP Mrs. S.V. Sonavane appearing for the Appellant - State submitted that, the Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence of Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1). At the relevant time daughter of the accused was in 8th standard. The prosecution through Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1) had proved that on 14.07.1992 the accused was present alongwith the victims in Flat No. 19, at the place of crime. Three days prior to 14.07.1992, the accused had told them that he will bring worms medicines. On 14.07.1992 the accused gave tablets to victim and Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1). The accused gave 4-5 tablets to Tejas, to Urvi, 7-8 tablets to Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1) and 12-13 tablets to Meghna. In the cross examination of Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1) she confirms that on 14.07.1992 her father gave tablets not prescribed by the doctor. She confirms that the accused told them that they would required Ayurvedic medicines for stomach worms. Though Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1) was not subjected to any medical test for long sleeping hours, giddiness suggests that Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1) was under the influence of some tablets. Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1) in his cross examination confirms that on 14.07.1992 the accused was present with the victims. Kum. Purvi Mataliya (PW 1) in her cross examination answered that the accused crushed 4-5 tablets in Khalbatta mixed with honey and gave it to Urvi and Tejas. Her testimony was not shaken regarding the incident that happened between 14.07.1992 to 16.07.1992. She confirmed that she could not go with her father because she felt giddiness. She further confirmed that as soon as they took the tablets they went to sleep. On 15.07.1992 she went to sleep at 4:30 pm. As she was not feeling well and she was feeling sleepy. She stated that, accused left residence on 15.07.1992. Her testimony is consistent about the timing and her physical condition which supports that she was also administered.