MADHUKAR PUNJAJI RHOI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT/original Accused in Sessions Case No. 162/98 has preferred this appeal against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik, whereby the accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of I. P. C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) i. d. to undergo R. I. for two months.

(2.) THE brief facts given rise to this appeal are as under: accused Madhusudan Rhoi was serving as a police constable at Niphad Police Station. Village Shivdi is within the jurisdiction of Nifad. Deceased Mangala was residing at Shivdi alongith her three minor daughters namely Shipla, Sonali and Monali. Her husband Yadav was serving in army. Accused Madhukar Bhoi had illicit relations with the deceased Mangala. He even used to visit her house. On 24. 6. 1998 in the evening he went to the house of deceased Mangala and asked her to prepare food and he went to village. When he was sitting at the par or (Ota) Bhavdya a Sandesh met him. Then accused called liquor bottle from the house of Mangala and he as well as Bhavdya consumed liquor. AT about 8. 00 p. m. Bhavdya and accused went to the house of Mangala and both of them took their meals there Bhavdya then left her house. Thereafter, when accused was chit chatting with Mangala some quarrel took place between them. Deceased Mangala some quarrel took place between them. Deceased Mangala told accused that he should not visit her house. On that accused asked her as to why one Domsale used to visit her house. At that time the three daughters of Mangala were watching T. V. in the front room. When the quarrel was going on with Mangale, the accused all of a sudden took kerosene can which was in the house and poured keronsene on the person of Mangala and set her on fire by using lighted match stick. On hearing cry of Mangala her daughters went in the rear room and they found that their mother had sustained burn. As soon as the daughters of Mangala went in the rear room the accused ran away by opening the rear door of their house. On hearing the hue and cry the neighbours gathered there. Thereafter Shilpa went to the house of her uncle Sukhdev, whereas her sister Sonali went to the house of her maternal aunt Satyabhamabai and gave them information about the incident when Satyabhamabai and her mother went there they found that Mangala had sustained burn injuries. Mangala told Rukhminibai that accused Madhukar set her on fire. Thereafter, complainant Sukhdev, the younger brother of husband of deceased Mangala arrived at the said place and he also found that Mangala had sustained burn injuries. He therefore went to Niphad Police Station and gave information about Mangalas death. Head constable Sonawane who was on duty recorded the complaint Ex. P. 14. of Sukhdev and registered the offence as crime no. 73/98 of sukhdev and registered the offence as crime no. 73/98 for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of I. P. C. P. S. I. Deshmukh then took investigation and immediately proceeded to the place of offence. He drew the inquest panchanama as well as the panchanama of the place of offence and sent the dead body of Mangala for post mortem.

(3.) P. S. I. Deshmukh recorded the statement of witnesses and searched for the accused. However, accused was not found at village Shivdi as well at Niphad. Dr. Gujaria carried out post mortem on 25. 6. 98 and opined that the cause of death was due to Cardio respiratory failure due to 100% superficial to deep burns.