(1.) APPELLANT Devidas, husband of deceased Sunita has been convicted only under S. 302 IPC while he, along with other 7 accused i.e. his parents, brothers and wives of those brothers are acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304 -B of the IPC and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Sunita was found dead in her room at about 4 to 4.30 in the afternoon of 22.02.1996.
(2.) FACTS in brief show that appellant Devidas and his other relatives were charge -sheeted for murder of Sunita wife of Devidas by strangulating with rope in a room in occupation of the couple on 22.02.1996.
(3.) SHRI Mardikar, learned Senior Counsel argues that PW -6 Dr. Patil also could not demonstrate that left shoulder of the deceased was dislocated at any time before her death. Prosecution did not collect any such evidence and fact of dislocation itself is in dispute. Such a story could not have been used to convict the appellant. Adverse inference needed to be drawn against prosecution for suppressing the letters of Sunita and witnesses in favour of accused.