V.K. Tahilramani, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is preferred by the appellant - original accused against the judgment and order dated 13.6.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras, Dist. Solapur in Sessions Case Nos. 13 of 2006. By the said judgment and order, the learned Session Judge convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default R.I. for one month.
(2.) THE prosecution case briefly stated, is as under: (a) Deceased Sharmila was the daughter of PW 1 Shantabai and sister of PW 2 Dattatraya. Sharmila was married to the appellant about five years prior to the incident. The appellant and Sharmila had three children i.e two sons and one daughter. At the time of the incident, the children of Sharmila were residing with her mother -in -law at Venegaon. Shantabai along with her son Dattatraya was residing at Village Kolegaon, Taluka Malshiras, District Solapur. Soon after the marriage, the appellant started suspecting that Sharmila had illicit relations with some other person(s) and hence, he used to harass her and beat her. He also used to drive her out of the house. Whenever Sharmila was driven out of the house, she used to come and stay with her mother Shantabai at Kolegaon. (b) During the period of five years of marriage that Sharmila was married to the appellant, the appellant deserted Sharmila on two to four occasions. Sharmila on these occasions used to come and reside with her mother Shantabai. On these occasions, the appellant used to come to the house of Shantabai and request Shantabai to sent his wife Sharmila with him for cohabitation. Thereafter, Shantabai used to send Sharmila with the appellant to his house. (c) On the last occasion, the appellant had come to the house of Shantabai with six persons from Venegaon and in the meeting, the appellant agreed that he would treat his wife Sharmila properly and not give her any cause to make any complaint, hence, Shantabai agreed to send her daughter Sharmila with the appellant. The appellant also executed an agreement on stamp paper stating therein that he would treat his wife Sharmila properly. After that Sharmila gave birth to a son at Venegaon. Thereafter, the appellant again started harassing Sharmila, therefore, Sharmila came to the house of Shantabai and started living with her. Three days thereafter, the appellant came to the house of Shantabai and expressed his desire to live with Sharmila separately in the house of Laxman who was the brother of Shantabai. The hut of Laxman was situated one hut away from the hut of Shantabai. The house of Laxman was vacant as Laxman along with his family had gone to Kolhapur in relation to sugarcane harvesting. Shantabai used to tether her she -goats in the house of Laxman. Every day in the morning, she used to go to untie the she -goats. (d) The incident occurred on the night between 17.1.2006 and 18.1.2006. On the night of 17.1.2006, the appellant and deceased Sharmila took dinner in the house of Shantabai. Thereafter, they went to the house of Laxman where they were residing. On the next day morning, Shantabai went to the house of Laxman to release the she -goats. She entered into the house. She found that the appellant was not present in the house and she saw the dead body of Sharmila lying on Charpai with ligature mark on the neck. Shantabai started shouting whereupon neighbours came to the spot. They confirmed that Sharmila was no more. Shantabai then lodged F.I.R. Thereafter, investigation commenced. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed. In due course, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charge came to be framed against the appellant under Section 302 of IPC. The appellant -accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. His defence was that of total denial and false implication. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated in paragraph 1 above, hence, this appeal.
(3.) WE have heard the learned Advocate for the appellant and the learned APP for the State. After giving our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the parties, the judgment delivered by the learned Sessions Judge and the evidence on record, for the reasons stated below, we are of the opinion that there is no merit in the appeal.;