A.I.S. Cheema, J. - (1.) APPELLANT Premsingh Narayan Jadhav (hereafter referred as "accused") is original accused No.1 who along with his parents and brothers and their wives, faced trial in Sessions Case No.90 of 1999 in the Court of Sessions at Nanded for offence under Section 302, 498 -A, 304 -B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C."). Accused Nos. 2 to 7 (hereafter referred as "other accused") came to be acquitted while the Appellant -accused came to be convicted of offence punishable under Section 498 -A of I.P.C. and has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/ -, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months; he has also been convicted for offence punishable under Section 304 -B of I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years. He came to be acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. Being aggrieved, present Appeal has been filed.
(2.) CASE of prosecution, in brief, is as under: - (A) Complainant Rajusingh Pandurang Rathod (PW -3), resident of Wai Bazar, Tq -Mahur, Dist - Nanded, on 30th March 1999, filed First Information Report (Exhibit 40) with Mahur Police Station at Crime No.18 of 1999 at about 12.45 hours. In short, the complaint was: - (I) His sister Sangita (now deceased hereafter referred as "victim") was married on 13th May 1998 to Appellant -accused Premsingh. Premsingh resides at Ramnagar, Tq -Kinwat, Dist -Nanded. F.I.R. refers to the other accused staying at Ramnagar. At the time of marriage, appellant -accused Premsingh was given cash Rs. 5000/ -, one gold ring, one cot, one table fan and other articles. After marriage, 2 -3 4 times victim came to her parent's place. (II) In October 1998, victim Sangita came to place of the complainant and told them that her husband (Appellant -accused) and other accused were demanding Rs. 15,000/ -, four Tola gold and colour T.V. and for the same, are abusing her and she had also been beaten. She had been brought and left in front of house by Appellant -accused and had been told that unless she gets the above articles, she should not come back. Thereafter for almost 1 1/2 months, the victim stayed at the place of her parents. (III) Complainant and his father went to Bhousingh, the uncle of Appellant -accused and with his help a private meeting was called at the place of Sarpanch Nursing Jadhav. In the meeting, things were explained to the Appellant -accused and his family and they accepted to take back the victim. Next day father of complainant reached the victim 5 Sangita to her matrimonial home. (IV) Eight days thereafter Pandurang Rathod, father of the complainant went to meet the victim. Even at that time, victim complained that her husband and in -laws were picking up quarrels on petty things as their demand for dowry had not been fulfilled. Pandurang made the victim understand. (V) In last week of February 1999, complainant had gone, due to some death at the place of relative Chavan, at Ramnagar and at the time of last rites met the Appellant -accused who was there and with him went to his house. The victim had gone to field for work. Appellant - accused complained that the victim does not work and gives excuses of stomach ache. Complainant asked Appellant -accused to bring her to Wai and that he will spend for the treatment at Pusad. After 7 -8 days, Appellant -accused brought victim 6 to the place of complainant and the victim was shown to Dr. Papadkar at Pusad. After treatment she went with the Appellant -accused. (VI) After another two days, the Appellant - accused went to the place of complainant and threatened that if his demand for articles is not met, he does not want to live with the victim and he wants to perform another marriage and the victim should be taken back. On next day, Pandurang Rathod (the father) went to the place of victim. Appellant -accused went away without talking to him and Pandurang made the daughter understand. (VII) On 29th March 1999, in the evening at about 6.30 p.m. complainant was at his General Store at Wai. The Appellant -accused came there with his friend Vasant. He threatened complainant that the victim should be taken away immediately as he wants to perform another marriage and if she 7 is not taken, he will kill her and nothing is going to happen to him. At that time the father and brother of complainant also reached the shop. Complainant asked the Appellant -accused to reach his sister on next day. The father of complainant tried to make the Appellant -accused understand but he left in anger. (VIII) On 30th March 1999, in the morning at 7.30 a.m. when complainant was at his shop at Wai, around 8.00 a.m. Sarpanch came there and informed that victim Sangita had expired. Complainant expressed that Appellant -accused and his family members must have killed her. Complainant sent his brother Vijay to Ramnagar to find out what happened. He went and later on informed that victim had expired and from her mouth and nose blood was coming out and that she had been killed. . Thus, the F.I.R. was filed. (B) After the offence being registered, P.S.I. Prakash Giri (PW -7) investigated the offence. He rushed to the spot and found the dead body in the house of the Appellant -accused. Panchas were called and Inquest Panchnama was carried out. Spot Panchnama was also done. The body was sent for postmortem. Medical Officer Venkatesh Dhat (PW -1) carried out the postmortem. Smell of insecticidal poison was detected in the stomach. Viscera was preserved and C.A. Report was called. After receipt of C.A. Report, final report was given that victim died due to poison. Investigating Officer Prakash Giri (PW -7) seized clothes of victim. Further investigation was done by A.P.I. Vilas Jadhav (PW -6). The accused were arrested. Statements were recorded. After investigation, charge -sheet came to be filed against the Appellant -accused and six other accused. Charge was framed for Sections mentioned 9 above. Accused pleaded not guilty. The defence is of denial and accused claimed that victim had ailment of stomach and thus she could not tolerate the pain and committed suicide by consuming poison.
(3.) PROSECUTION brought on record evidence of seven witnesses. No defence evidence was led. After considering the matter, trial Court convicted Appellant -accused as mentioned above, while other accused came to be acquitted.;