JUDGMENT - V.M. KANADE, J.:---The appellant/accused, in this appeal, is challenging the judgment and order passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, in Sessions Trial No. 18/95, on 6-1-1997 whereby the Additional Sessions Judge, convicted the accused under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to suffer further R.I. for one year. The accused is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default to suffer further R.I. for 6 months. It was further directed that both the sentences should run concurrently.

2. Facts:

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows :

The appellant/accused married Nirmala who was the daughter of Shripat Bapurao Raut, on 1-5-1992. The marriage was performed as per the customary rites at Abaji Maharaj Devasthan, Babhulgaon and after marriage. Nirmala went with her husband and they started residing in the matrimonial house at Warkhed. After 5-6 months they shifted to village Mangsawangi.

3. It is a case of the prosecution that the accused was paid dowry of Rs. 15,000/- at the time of marriage and even after marriage the accused used to demand money from the father of Nirmala and if the said amount was not paid, the accused used to severally beat and ill-treat her. It is their case that after marriage, on 2-3 occasions when Nirmala visited her maternal place at Khangaon, she had disclosed this fact to her father. She had also disclosed that the accused had threatened her that if the amount which was demanded by him was not paid by her father, she would be killed.

4. It is alleged that on 18-11-1994 at about 2.00 p.m. the accused mercilessly assaulted Nirmala by giving fist and kicks blows and also assaulted her with a stick and throttled her, as a result of which, she died.

5. It is further alleged that prior to this incident when Nirmala had gone to her maternal house for delivery of her first child, the accused had demanded Rs. 7000/- from his father-in-law and out of the said amount which was demanded, an amount of Rs. 6500/- was paid to the accused by the father of Nirmala.

6. It is further alleged that the accused had demanded Rs. 3000/- more at that time. However, the father of Nirmala had expressed his inability to the said demand. Since the demand made by the accused was not fulfilled by his father-in-law, the accused had taken his wife Nirmala to the matrimonial house. The prosecution has further alleged that after Nirmala was murdered by the accused, the prosecution had taken search of the house of the accused and had recovered certain articles. It is further alleged that the father of deceased Nirmala had also given two letters which were sent by the accused to him demanding dowry. In one letter, he had demanded Rs. 500/- as dowry and in the other letter he had demanded a ceiling fan.

7. The prosecution filed its charge sheet and on the basis of the charge-sheet, the charge was framed against the accused under section 302 read with section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge.

8. The prosecution examined 8 witnesses. The entire evidence adduced by the prosecution was in the nature of circumstantial evidence. Out of the 8 witnesses which were examined by the prosecution, P.W. 1 Madhukar Bapurao Raut is the maternal uncle of deceased Nirmala, who had filed the complaint to the Police Station at 11.00 a.m. on 18-11-1994. P.W. 2 Shripat Bapuraoji Raut is the father of the deceased, who has produced two letters which were sent by the accused demanding dowry and he has further stated that deceased Nirmala had on 2-3 occasions informed him that the accused used to assault her and ill-treat her and used to demand money from her P.W. 3 Suman is an aunt of deceased Nirmala. She has been examined to prove that deceased Nirmala had

Click Here to Read the rest of this document