THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. RAMCHANDRA GOVIND LOKHANDE AGE. 40, R/O. CHORE, TALUKA
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Ramchandra Govind Lokhande Age. 40, R/O. Chore, Taluka
Click here to view full judgement.
Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J. -
(1.) The appellant - State of Maharashtra has preferred this appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 31st July, 1995, passed by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Satara in Sessions Case No.67 of 1987. By the said Judgment and Order, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent-original accused under Sections 302, 201 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C.').
(2.) The prosecution case briefly stated, is as under:-
Deceased - Nirmala Ramchandra Lokhande was the wife of the respondent. The respondent, his wife-Nirmala and their son-Sudhir were residing at Mangalwar Peth, Satara. Sudhir was about 6 years old at the time of the incident. The respondent was addicted to liquor and used to assault his wife - Nirmala daily. The incident had occurred on the night between 27th February and 28th February, 1987. The respondent, his wife and their son were in the house. At about 6.00 to 6.30 a.m., neighbours heard shouts of the respondent - accused. The respondent stated 'what have you done'. The neighbours came to the room of the respondent. They saw that the door of the room of the respondent was shut. The door was locked from inside. The respondent opened the door of the house after 2 to 3 minutes. The neighbours noticed that the body of the wife of the respondent was lying in the room. The body was burnt. The clothes were also burnt. The body was motionless. The neighbours asked the respondent to lodge FIR. Thereafter, the respondent lodged FIR. The body was sent for postmortem. PW.6-PSI, Madhukar Nanasaheb Kava the collected advance medical certificate. This disclosed that it was a case of murder. Hence, on behalf of the State, he lodged FIR (Exhibit-38). Thereafter, investigation commenced. On the very same day i.e. 28th February, 1987, the respondent came to be arrested. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed.
(3.) Charge came to be framed against the respondent under Sections 302, 201 and 498A of the I.P.C. The respondent pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. His defence is that of total denial and false implication. His further defence is that his wife committed suicide and he has been falsely implicated in this case. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent - accused of all the charges, hence, this appeal.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.