BACHARAM KRISHNA POWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Application has been filed by the Appellants herein against the conviction and sentence imposed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, in Sessions Case No. 2 of 1990, by his judgment and order dated 27th February, 1991, whereby the Appellant No.1-Bacharam has been held guilty of the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer one year's simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, and in default, to suffer further three month's simple imprisonment. Appellant No.1-Bacharm has been also held guilty of the offence punishable under Section 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer three year's simple imprisonment, and both the above sentence were to run concurrently. Similarly, by the aforeside judgment and order, Appellant No.2-Laxmibai has been held guilty of the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, but instead of sentencing her to any punishment, has been released on entering into a bond in the sum of Rs. 2000/- for a period of two years to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period.

(2.) THE brief facts of this case are that one Prabhavati was married with Balasaheb who is the brother of Appellant No.1-Bacharam, and Appellant 2-Laxmibai is the wife of another brother by name Banda Powar of Appellant No.1. The said Prabhavati was residing with her husband at village Ingali Kodoli, Taluka- Hatkanangale, District Kolhapur. Out of the said wedlock, a child was born. It appears that the said Prabhavati was suffering from some severe chronic stomach ailment, loose motions mixed with blood. It is the case of the prosecution that one of the brothers-in-law of the said Prabhavati viz. Bacharam Krishna Powar, the Appellant No.1 herein and one of the sisters-in-law viz.Laxmibai Banda Powar, the Appellant No.2 herein were harassing her at her husband's place, and the members of her husband's family were not taking her care though she was sick, and ultimately she had shifted at her parents place situated at Kasaba Bawada in Kolhapur City so as to enable her to take proper medical treatment at C.P.R. Hospital at Kolhapur, which is the Government hospital.

(3.) THE prosecution in this case has examined in all five witnesses. The first witness was Mr. Sidram Sambhaji Suryavanshi, the police head constable at Shahupuri Police Station, Kolhapur. His evidence is only to the limited extent that he was asked by the Police Inspector Katambale to register the crime at Sr.No.216 under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. His evidence is limited only to the extent that he had registered the crime in the crime register under the aforesaid sections against the Appellants.