TANAJI GANAPATI NILAPANKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has been convicted by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur vide his Judgment dated 13th October, 1995 in Criminal Appeal No. 663 of 1995 for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 498-A of I.P.C. respectively as indicated below:

(2.) ACCORDING to prosecution case, marriage of Accused No.1 Tanaji with deceased Anandibai took place in the year 1987. After some time, accused No. 1 and acquitted accused Nos. 2 and 3 mother in law and brother in law of deceased started asking Anandibai to bring golden chain of 1.1/2 tola from parents and on that count she was being ill-treated. Because of the poverty of parents of Anandi, said demand was not fulfilled. Anandi was sent to her parent's house and she resided there for one year. Thereafter appellant, in-laws and one Dinkar Kokate from Walave went to the house of parents of Anandi and assured that they will not ill-treat Anandi and hence, they have taken Anandi with them for cohabitation. Anandi always used to visit her parents' house and used to tell about ill-treatment at the hands of accused persons. The family members of parents of Anandi also used to visit house of appellant.

(3.) AS we noted earlier, there is only one eye witness P.W. 1 Krishnat Pandurang Wadkar who is step brother of the deceased Anandibai. In his evidence he narrated the ill-treatment that has been meted out against the deceased Anandibai by Appellant and acquitted accused Nos. 2 and 3 on account of the demand of gold chain weighing 1.1/2 tolas. He also stated that on 3 or 4 occasions when Anandibai went to her parents, appellant and acquitted accused went to her house and assured Anandibai's parents that it will not be repeated and they will not ill-treat her thereafter. But still P.W. 1 says in his evidence that on 18.11.1994 the deceased and appellant came to their house when one of his relative Satappa Krishna Khade was also present there. At about 8.30 p.m. after taking dinner they all were chitchatting. At that time appellant asked why his demand of golden chain was not fulfilled. Then P.W. 1, his father, uncle by name Tukaram and said relative tried to pacify the appellant that it is not possible to fulfill said demand due to poverty. At that time, appellant took a stick from house and gave a stroke of stick on the head of his father and that stroke also hit on the chest of his father. When appellant was giving another stroke, said Khade intervened and stroke of stick hit on the hand of Khade. Then they tried to catch appellant. However, he ran away. On the next day, they sent message to the house of appellant. After the said message mother and brother of appellant came to their house at about 1 to 1.30 noon and after some time appellant also came to their house. Appellant told them that he will not give any ill-treatment and accused asked them to send his sister. Then the accused persons had taken his sister to their house. On 20.11.1994 his uncle asked him to go to the house of his sister and to see. Then he along with cousin brother Dattatraya went to the house of his sister. His sister Anandibai and her husband were at house. Tea was offered to them. Thereafter, Anandibai asked him to stay there and asked his cousin to go. Accordingly he stayed there. At about 8 to 8.30 p.m. deceased Anandibai was cooking. At that time, deceased Anandibai, appellant and P.W.1 were in the house. In the course of talk appellant asked why demand of golden chain is not fulfilled. He asked him that he is not in a position to given golden chain and asked that why he is demanding golden chain again and again. Then appellant started abusing him. Deceased Anandibai asked appellant not to give abuses to him. Then the appellant had taken pick-axe and gave a stroke of it on the head of deceased Anandibai. As appellant had lifted pick-axe he shouted, however by that time he gave stroke of it on the head of deceased Anandibai. As P.W. 1 shouted, mother of appellant Bhagirathi and sister in law of appellant came there. Those ladies were residing in the same house, but separately. Because of the said stroke, deceased Anandibai fell on the ground. Then appellant rushed towards P.W.1 with the said pick-axe. Then P.W.1 started running towards Palkarwadi because of fear. Appellant was also chasing him. Then while running he entered in sugarcane crop. He was in sugarcane crop for whole night. In the morning he came out of said sugarcane crop and he went to Chandre Patil on walk. From there by bus he came to his village. He reached to his village at about 8 to 8.30 a.m. Then he informed about the incident to his parents and uncle. Then they engaged one tractor of Kashinath Patil. Then all their family members and some villagers went to village Walava, the village of the appellant. Then they went to the house of appellant. They saw a pool of blood in the house. The persons from lane told that dead body was sent for post mortem. Ocular account of P.W. 1 has to be scrutinized and evaluated very cautiously and carefully because he is close relative of the deceased. In the evidence of P.W. 5 Dr.Rajendra Ramkrishna Godbole has noted in his post mortem report four injuries on the corpse of the deceased as follows: