IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Khandeparkar R.M.S. Mohite R.S., JJ.
Manohar Kushaba Gangurde .... Appellant.
Versus
Police Sub-Inspector of State of Maharashtra.... Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 1992, decided on 10-6-2004.
Advocates appeared :
S.S. Kulkarni with Sachin Chavan, for appellant.
P.H. Kantharia, A.P.P., for respondent.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Conviction for murder. - Where evidence of eye- witness, real sister of accused that accused gave blow to deceased with bamboo and threatened her that if she came forward he would assault her, was not shaken in cross-examination then conviction not required any interference.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Conviction for murder. - Where deceased wife frequently quarrel with accused due to his relationship with another lady whom he kept as mistress and living like husband and wife, therefore immediate motive for commission of offence established.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Conviction for murder. - Where injuries found on person of deceased clearly corrobo- rated by post-mortem report and also by report of chemical analyst therefore conviction of accused warrants no interference.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:--
A. That the complainant Kushaba Dondiba Gangurde (P.W. 2) was a resident of village Vadali Bhairav where he was residing along with his wife and two sons, namely, Kalu and Mohan. The accused Monohar was his third and eldest son and he lived adjacent to the house of the complainant, separately from the other members of the family. The deceased Baby alias Sunanda was the wife of the accused Manohar and was living with him in his house. The relationship between the accused and the deceased were not cordial as the accused had kept a mistress. The deceased wife baby used to quarrel with the accused on account of the accused keeping a mistress.
B. That on the date of the incident i.e. 13-3-1991, at about 7.00 p.m., one Baban Battise (P.W. 3), who was a person residing nearby, heard someone giving abuses. He glanced out of the house and saw the accused and the deceased at a distance of about 100 cubits from his house near the water tank. He saw that the deceased was weeping and the accused was giving a threat to kill her. He heard the accused telling the deceased that he should be permitted to bring his mistress or else he would kill the deceased wife. The deceased was saying that she would not permit the accused to bring the other woman. He saw the accused getting enraged and thereafter lifting the deceased and throwing her on the ground. Seeing this, this witness got frightened and went inside his house.
C. It is further case of the prosecution that on the same day i.e. 13-3-1991, at about 10.00 p.m., the accused beat his wife baby. The deceased baby rushed out of the house after receiving the beating at the hands of the accused. The accused chased the deceased and beat her with a bamboo stick, causing multiple injuries on her person. He thereafter dragged the deceased by holding her legs and brought her to his house in naked condition and left the deceased at his house when he found that she was dead and went away from the spot.
D. The father of the accused (P.W. 2) Kushaba Dondiba Gangurde was amongst the several villagers who had gathered there. He went to the Vadner Bhairav Police Station and lodged a complaint. In the complaint he gave a detailed and an eye-witness account as to how his son beat and killed his daughter-in-law. He claimed to be an eye-witness to the entire incident of beating.
E. Prior to the lodging of this complaint, P.W. 15 P.S.I. Ramnath Mhatarba Dighe happened to have gone to village Vadali Bhairav. While he was there, Head Constable Deore and other police staff had brought the accused the Vadner Bhairav Police Station on 14-3-1991 at 00.40 hours. P.S.I. Dighe came to the Police Station and made inquires with the accused and then again went to the village Vadali Bhairav. There he went to the house of the accused and found the dead body of the deceased lying outside the house of the accused. He kept a Constable near the dead body. The father, mother and other relatives of the accused had come to the Police Chowky. After lodging a complaint against his own son as aforesaid, which was reduced into writing, PSI Dighe then registered an offence under section 302 of the I.P.C. against the accused. Since the accused was already in the Police Station, the banian and the underpant of the accused were seized in the presence of the panchas. P.S.I. Dighe again went to the village and prepared the inquest panchnama of the dead body (Exhibit 11). He sent the dead body for post-mortem. He prepared the spot panchnama as per Exhibit 12
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.