Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT NAGPUR BENCH
V.M. DESHPANDE, J.
Shrikrishna Marotrao Thawkar - Appellant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra, Through P.S.O. Police Station Ner, Taluka Ner, District Yavatmal - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.14 OF 2003
Decided On : 3.12.2015
Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Sections 498-A and 306 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Indian Penal Code, Sections 498-A, 306 - The judgment discusses the prosecution's case against the appellant for offenses under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The court evaluates the evidence presented, including medical reports, witness testimonies, and the applicability of Section 113-A of the Evidence Act, 1872, in determining the guilt of the appellant.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for offenses under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code for the suicide of his wife. The prosecution alleged that the appellant subjected his wife to cruelty, leading to her suicide. The court evaluated the evidence, including medical reports and witness testimonies, to determine the guilt of the appellant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It noted discrepancies in witness testimonies, unexplained delays in lodging the first information report, and lack of evidence linking the alleged ill-treatment to the act of suicide. As a result, the court acquitted the appellant of the charges under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
Issues: The issues revolved around proving the nature of death, establishing the appellant's responsibility for the suicide, and evaluating the evidence of cruelty and ill-treatment. The court also addressed the delay in lodging the first information report and the reliability of witness testimonies.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the prosecution's burden to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. It highlighted the importance of corroborated evidence, the applicability of Section 113-A of the Evidence Act, 1872, and the need for a live link between alleged ill-treatment and the act of suicide.
Final Decision: The court allowed the criminal appeal, quashed the judgment and order of conviction, and acquitted the appellant of the offenses punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant's bail-bonds were cancelled, and any paid fine amount was to be refunded to him.
1. By the present appeal, the correctness and legality of the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, in Sessions Trial No.162 of 1998 on 24.12.2002 is under challenge before this Court.
(a) By the impugned judgment and order of conviction, the appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
(b) On account of his conviction under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, and in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days.
(c) On account of his conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, learned Judge of the Court below has sentenced the appellant that he should suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, and in default, it is directed that he shall further suffer rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days.
Factual Matrix :
2. The prosecution case, as it is unfolded during the course of the trial, is narrated hereinunder :
a) The appellant was married to Chanda who was daughter of PW1 Ukandrao Namdeorao Ishwarkar. The marriage took place on 13.12.1993. The marriage was performed at village Tembhi, District Yavatmal. Undisputedly, both of families of Chanda and the appellant were residents of village Tembhi.
b) After the marriage, couple left for Surat, a city of Gujarat State. According to the prosecution case, there the appellant was working in a diamond factory. Couple stayed there for about four to five years. Thereafter, they shifted themselves to village Tembhi and were residing in their own house. The appellant also owned an agricultural field property at the said village and mother-in-law of Chanda Jaiwantabai Thawkar was also residing at village Tembhi.
c) The prosecution case further proceeds that after couple return to village Tembhi, the appellant took the habit of drinking and under the influence of liquor he used to commit atrocities on his wife Chanda. According to the prosecution, through Chanda there used to be a demand of money by the appellant from her parents and the said demand used to be fulfilled.
d) The prosecution further states that on 21.8.1998 Chanda committed suicide by drinking endrine. She died on 21.8.1998.
e) On 23.8.1998, prosecution witness No.4 police head constable Ashok Wasudeorao Dudhane was discharging his duties as station diary incharge at Ner Police Station. At about 8:00 pm, on the said date, PW1 Ukandrao Namdeorao Ishwarkar reached to the said police station and lodged his oral complaint. As per the dictates of PW1 Ukandrao Namdeorao Ishwarkar, police head constable Ashok Wasudeorao Dudhane recorded his complaint. The said complaint is at Exh.12. As the oral report was disclosing a commission of cognizable offence, the offence was registered by police head constable Ashok Wasudeorao Dudhane vide Crime No.137 of 1998 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The printed FIR is at Exh.13. After registration of the offence, police head constable Ashok Wasudeorao Dudhane handed over the investigation of crime to Assistant Sub Inspector Gajanan Khode who carried the entire investigation. The charge-sheet came to be filed by Assistant Sub Inspector Gajanan Khode before the Court of law.
3. Since the offences for which charge-sheet came to be presented against the appellant were exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, learned magistrate in whose Court the charge-sheet was presented ordered committal of the case to the Court of Sessions.
Learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, on whose file Sessions Trial No.162 of 1998 was proceeding, under Exh.6 on 12.11.2002 framed charge against the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant abjured his guilt and claimed that he be tried. In order to bring home the gui
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
