MANGALABAI DINESH SHIRSATH (D) THR. LR. Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
LAWS(BOM)-2017-1-176
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: AURANGABAD)
Decided on January 19,2017

Mangalabai Dinesh Shirsath (D) Thr. Lr. Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

T.V.NALAWADE,J. - (1.) The revision is filed against the judgment and order of Sessions Case No.78/2002 which was pending in the Court of learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule. Respondents are acquitted by the Sessions Court of the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Both sides are heard.
(2.) The deceased Mangalabai was daughter of present petitioner. She was given in marriage to respondent No.1 Dinesh on 20-2-2002. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are younger brothers of respondent No.1 and accused Nos.4 and 5 are the parents of respondent No.1. No issue is born out of this wedlock. Prior to the marriage, accused No.1 was working in a company from Udhana, Gujarat, and there he started cohabiting with Mangalabai. When he lost the job he was given work by husband of sister of Mangalabai viz. Bhaskar Patil by employing him as a driver on his tempo.
(3.) There are allegations that after the marriage, Mangalabai started disclosing that her husband and parents of the husband were asking her to sell her ornament, Mangalpot, as they wanted some money for taking well in their field. When she refused to handover the ornament, they asked her to bring Rs.10,000/- from her parents. Mangalabai disclosed that when she refused to bring money, ill-treatment was started to her. She started disclosing that the husband was even giving beating to her. Then another demand was made of Rs.30,000/- by saying that accused No.1 wanted to purchase a tempo for doing transport business. This demand was made even to Bhaskar by accused No.1. Bhaskar Patil had promised accused No.1 to purchase one tempo after one to two years.;


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