RUPA VILASH KHOT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two separate appeals are preferred by original Accused Nos.1 and 2 challenging the judgment and order dated 19 th October, 2012 of Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 551 of 2011, thereby convicting them for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/ each; in default to suffer R.I. for 30 days on the first count and R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/ each; in default to suffer R.I. for 30 days on the second count.

(2.) Brief facts of the appeal can be stated as follows; Accused No.1 Rupa Vilas Khot is the wife of deceased Vilas Madhukar Khot. They were residing at building no.8, Shubharambh CoOp. Housing Society, PMGP Colony, Andheri (East), Mumbai along with their minor son PW12 Om Vilas Khot.

(3.) On 11/4/2011 while PW1 PSI Sunil Khatpe, attached to MIDC Police Station, was on duty at about 7.30 a.m. Dr.Kamlesh Tripathi informed him on telephone that Vilas Khot has died in suspicious circumstances; hence PW1 PSI Sunil Khatpe rushed to the spot. Accused No.1 was present there. He made inquiries with her; but she gave evasive replies. He found the dead body of Vilas lying on the wooden sofa wearing only half pant with several injuries on his face, neck, both arms and other parts of the body. Accordingly, he prepared the inquest cum spot panchanama (Exh.17) and sent body for postmortem examination. At the spot, he found the blood stains on the fridge, sofacover, bedsheet. He removed the pillow covers and found that there were blood stains on the three pillows. He also found the recently washed shirt and pant of the deceased in wet condition and kept for drying in the balcony. He also found that the just washed and wet pillowcover and bedsheet with blood stains thereon. He noted all these facts in the spot panchanama in presence of PW3 panch Sanjay Mahadik. From the spot he also seized these incriminating articles. Then he returned to the MIDC Police Station and initially lodged ADR No.31 of 2011 under Section 174 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and, thereafter, considering the conduct of Accused No.1 in giving evasive replies and the prevailing situation on the spot of the incident, he lodged complaint Exh.18 against her.