Decided on September 11,2017

Shrinivas Narayan Kairamkonda Appellant


Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J. - (1.) This appeal is preferred by the appellant-original accused against the judgment and order dated 26.11.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No. 41 of 2014. By the said judgment and order, the learned Session Judge convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 504 of IPC. For the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, the learned Sessions Judge sentenced the appellant to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default, RI for six months. For the offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC, the appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, RI for three months. The learned Sessions Judge directed that both the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently.
(2.) The prosecution case briefly stated, is as under: (a) Deceased Sarita was the daughter of PW 6 Devidas. The marriage of Sarita and the appellant took place in the year 2001. They had two children i.e Yogesh and Namrata. Yogesh was about 9 years old at the time of the incident. The appellant was addicted to liquor and used to frequently demand money from his wife Sarita. He also used to assault Sarita. Devidas was residing about 10-12 houses away from the house of the appellant and Sarita. Whenever Sarita complained to Devidas, Devidas used to advise the appellant, however, there was no change in behaviour of the appellant. (b) The incident occurred on 15.9.2013. On that day at about 3.00 p.m., the appellant assaulted his wife Sarita with a scissor on the neck, chest, back, hands, abdomen etc. This was witnessed by PW 5 Yogesh who was the son of Sarita and the appellant. On seeing the incident, Yogesh shouted and assaulted his father with a steel pot (chambu). Yogesh ran outside the house shouting "Raktam Raktam (blood)". This was heard by PW 7 Sanjay who was the brother of the appellant. On hearing shouts, Sanjay entered in the house. Sanjay saw Sarita lying in a pool of blood in the kitchen. When he entered into the house, he saw the appellant running outside the house. Sanjay then along with others took Sarita to hospital. In the hospital, Sarita was declared dead on admission. (c) At about 4.00 p.m., PW 6 Devidas, the father of Sarita was informed that the appellant inflicted blows with scissor on Sarita. Devidas then went to the Civil Hospital. In the hospital, he came to know that Sarita had expired. Police recorded the complaint of Devidas in the hospital. Thereafter, investigation commenced. (d) The dead body of Sarita was sent for postmortem. PW 1 Dr. Bhoi conducted the postmortem on the dead body of Sarita. He found 22 injuries on the dead body of Sarita. According to him, the probable cause of death was due to stab injury to the abdomen. (e) Meanwhile, the appellant came to be arrested. At the time of arrest, the clothes on the person of the appellant were found stained with blood. They were seized under panchnama Exh. 27. During investigation, the blood stained scissor came to be recovered at the instance of the appellant under memorandum and panchnama Exh. 38 and 39. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed. In due course, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.
(3.) Charge came to be framed against the appellant - original accused under Sections 302 and 504 of IPC. The appellant pleaded guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. His defence is 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.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.