RAMESH Vs. STATE OF MAHAASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by judgment and order dated 29.07.1999 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Sessions Trial No.58/1996, convicting the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/, in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month so also convicting him for an offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/, in default, further rigorous imprisonment for one month, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) In support of the appeal, Mr. Mardikar, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant, contended that the trial Judge committed error in convicting the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 498A and 306 of the IPC. According to him, the trial Judge did not record any finding that there was any live link in the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC which is sine quo non for recording an order of conviction. He then submitted that there is no evidence of cruelty in order to convict him for an offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC. He then submitted that the evidence is vague and of general nature and there could be conviction for an offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC. From the evidence, it is apparent that the witnesses are tutored one and, therefore, the same is liable to be discarded. He then submitted that the appellant is a Government servant and may lose is employment. He, therefore, prayed for acquittal of the appellant by allowing the appeal.

(3.) Per contra, Mr. Khan, the learned A.P.P. supported the impugned judgment and order and submitted that no fault could be found with it. The learned trial Judge correctly appreciated the evidence and, therefore, no interference could be made in the impugned order.