MURLIDHAR S/O KASHINATH MEHTRE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH P S O SINDKEHDRAJA DIST BULDANA
LAWS(BOM)-2017-9-141
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on September 14,2017

Murlidhar S/O Kashinath Mehtre Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Through P S O Sindkehdraja Dist Buldana Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SWAPNA JOSHI,J. - (1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 20th September, 2003 in Sessions Case No.95/2000 delivered by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Buldana, convicting the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') for the offence punishable under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to suffer SI for six months, the present Appeal is filed. The accused has also been convicted of offence punishable u/s 498A, however, no separate sentence is awarded.
(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the instant Appeal may be summarized as under :- Deceased-Sharda, was sister of PW1-Pralhad Kharat. Her marriage with accused was performed on 22.4.1996. After marriage, Sharda started residing with the accused at Sindkhedraja. For about one-and-a-half years, accused maintained Sharda nicely, however, it is alleged that thereafter the accused started ill-treating Sharda. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused demanded an amount of Rs. 30,000/- for purchasing a motorcycle and on that count, he subjected Sharda to cruelty and harassment in connection with dowry. The parents of Sharda were residing at Jambhora. Whenever Sharda used to visit her parental home at Jambhora, she used to disclose about the demand made by the accused and ill-treatment at his hands. PW 1-Pralhad, his wife and parents used to give understanding to Sharda and asked her to reside at matrimonial home. It is the case of the prosecution that one month prior to the death of Sharda, she visited the house of her brother PW1-Pralhad. At that time she disclosed about the ill-treatment at the hands of the accused, for the demand of Rs. 30,000/- for purchasing a motorcycle and that the accused was ill-treating her for the said purpose. About 10 to 12 days prior to death of Sharda, one Sudam Kharat, (not examined) from Jambhora, visited the house of Sharda. On his return to Jambhora, he informed Pralhad (PW1) that accused assaulted Sharda and had not provided food to her. On 4.7.2000 at about 10.00 am when PW1-Pralhad was in his house he was informed by Raju Kelkar (not examined) on telephone that Sharda was admitted in General Hospital and was in serious condition. Accordingly, PW1-Pralhad along with Sanjay Aawhale and Shivdas Kharat went to General Hospital, Jalna. On reaching there, he saw the dead body of his sister-Sharda. At the relevant time, PW6 Ramesh Rajput, API, was attached to Police Station Sindkhedraja. He received the complaint Exh.33 of Pralhad and on the basis of it, he registered the offence. Earlier on the same day, accidental death was registered. PW6-Rajput, (API) recorded the statements of the witnesses He arrested the accused. He conducted the spot panchnama and took charge of box of 'Endosulfan' under the said spot panchnama. PW6 sent viscera and box of Endosulfan to Chemical Analyser's office,for analysis. On completion of investigation, he submitted the charge sheet in the Court of learned JMFC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charge was framed by the learned trial Judge. After conducting the trial and on analysis of evidence and hearing both sides, the learned trial Judge convicted the accused, as aforesaid. Hence, this Appeal.
(3.) I have heard Shri P B Patil, the learned counsel for the appellant/ accused and Shri S.B. Bissa, the learned Additional Public prosecutor for the respondent-State. With the assistance of both the counsels, I have gone through the entire record of the case meticulously.;


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