VILAS MADHUKAR LOKHANDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against appellant's conviction by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years with a fine of Rs. 2000/- or in default rigorous imprisonment for six months, and rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default rigorous imprisonment for three months imposed upon the appellant respectively on the two counts on conclusion of Sessions Case No. 195 of 1996 before him. Facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under:-

(2.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge to whom the case was made over, charged the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Since the appellant pleaded not guilty he was put on trial at which the prosecution examined in all six witnesses in its attempt to bring home guilt of the appellant. After considering the prosecution evidence in the light of defence of appellant that in the appellant's presence someone else assaulted the victim, the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant is before this Court.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State. With the help of both the learned counsel I have gone through the evidence on record. The victim Nanda Vilas Lokhande was examined as PW-1. She stated as to how the appellant started suspecting her character and as to how she left for her mother's house. She stated that on the incidental morning, the appellant was standing near the gate of CEAT Company, having come there on a bicycle. She was walking along with Vandana Vaikwad. Ummila and Taimavshi. One Mahendra Sardar was also present. The appellant asked victim to accompany him to his parent's house and the appellant then carried her with him. When they reached Nandini hospital, the appellant gave several blows on her person. She then stated about having gone to the police station handed over the knife, reported the matter to the police and having been sent to the hospital, as also about seizure of her blood stained clothes. In cross examination she stated that the appellant used to allege that she had illicit intimacy with Ranganath and Balu. The victim stated the appellant never alleged that she had any relation with a police constable attached to Satpur Police Station. Further suggestions made to the victim in the cross provide enough motive to the appellant to launch an assault on the victim. It was suggested to the victim that the appellant was unable to satisfy her sexually and therefore, she wanted divorce from him. It was suggested that she was interested in having relations with others as also physically she could over power the appellant and that she used to beat him up. It was suggested that the victim was having illicit relations with Mahendra Sardar, who just before the incident was walking with the victim and other coworkers. It was suggested that the victim and Mahendra Sardar were walking too closely and their bodies were touching each other. As if this was not enough, it was suggested to the victim that another person had accompanied the victim and that person was also victim's paramour and that as the said person had seen the victim in close proximity of Mahendra Sardar, that person hit the victim by knife and that the victim had, in fact, snatched the knife from her own paramour. She denied all these suggestions. She stated in her cross examination that after the assault, a motor cyclist whom she did not know came, she boarded the motor cycle and that the person carried her to the police station. The deficiency which was left in making reckless suggestions to the witnesses was made good by suggesting to PW-7 API Devidas Narayan Lahare that police constable attached to his police station, who had illicit intimacy with the victim had brought the victim to the police station.