Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
B.R. Gavai, V.M. Deshpande, JJ.
Harish S/o Shamsundar Chhangani & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 93 OF 2014
Decided On : 05-07-2016
498-A, 304B, 302 - Conviction upheld for 498-A and 304-B, acquitted for 302 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 498-A, 304-B, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It upheld the conviction of accused no.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B, while acquitting accused nos. 2 & 3 for the same. The court emphasized the need for the prosecution to establish each circumstance beyond reasonable doubt and exclude every possible hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. It also highlighted the distinction between 'may be proved' and 'must be or should be proved' and the requirement for a complete chain of evidence to prove guilt.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased Usha was married to accused no.1 Harish. The prosecution alleged ill-treatment and demand for dowry by the accused, leading to the death of Usha. The trial court convicted all three accused for offences under Sections 498-A, 304-B, and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court upheld the conviction of accused no.1 for 498-A and 304-B, while acquitting accused nos. 2 & 3 for the same.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against accused nos. 2 & 3 for the offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B. It acquitted accused nos. 2 & 3 for these charges. The court also acquitted accused no.1 for the offence punishable under Section 302, citing lack of evidence to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. However, it maintained the conviction of accused no.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the ill-treatment and demand for dowry by the accused, leading to the death of the deceased. The court analyzed the evidence to determine the guilt of the accused under Sections 498-A, 304-B, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the prosecution to establish each circumstance beyond reasonable doubt and exclude every possible hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. It also highlighted the distinction between 'may be proved' and 'must be or should be proved' and the requirement for a complete chain of evidence to prove guilt.
Final Decision: The court acquitted accused nos. 2 & 3 for the charges under Sections 498-A and 304-B, while maintaining the conviction of accused no.1 for the same. It acquitted accused no.1 for the charge under Section 302, citing lack of evidence to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
B.R. Gavai, J.
1. The accused/appellant being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304B and Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon dated 31.12.2013 in Sessions Trial No. 39/11, have approached this Court.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is thus :- The deceased Usha was resident of Jaisalmer (Rajasthan). On 1.6.2009 she was married to accused no.1 Harish at Jaisalmer. Accused nos. 2 & 3 are parents of accused No.1. After marriage, deceased Usha started residing with the accused persons at Khamgaon. It is the prosecution case that though in the marriage, the parents of deceased Usha had given 8 tola gold, 50 total silver, clothes and other articles, the accused persons were always making a grievance that the other items like T.V., Washing Machine, etc. were not given. As such, the parents of Usha came to Khamgaon for purchasing the aforesaid articles and gave the same to accused persons.
3. It is further the prosecution case that after 2-3 months of the marriage, Usha had visited her parents' house at Jaisalmer. She had made a grievance that the accused used to ill-treat her saying that certain items were not given in the marriage. After one month, Harish took her back. There after again after a period of 2-3 months Usha informed her parents on telephone that the accused persons were demanding an amount of Rs.50,000/- and ill-treating her for money. As such, in November, 2009 Usha's father Dhanraj and his friend Banwari came to the house of accused and gave Rs.10,000/- to the accused Harish. It is the prosecution case that even thereafter the ill-treatment continued. It is the prosecution case that the accused even went to the extent of physically manhandling the deceased.
4. It is the further prosecution case that in February, 2010 Usha visited her parents' home. Again at that time she complained about the ill-treatment. In March, 2010 accused Harish went to fetch Usha. From there, accused Harish, Usha and her parents went to Kumbh Mela at Haridwar and then to Bikaner. At that time, Dhanraj gave an amount of Rs.20,000/- to accused Harish. From there, Usha and Harish came back to Khamgaon.
5. It is the further prosecution case that even after this, the ill-treatment continued and as such, on 4.6.2010 Usha's parents, sister Chanchal (PW.12) and Shrigopal – husband of Chanchal came from Jaisalmer and other relatives Akash, Harish, Pramod and Jaideo came from Nagpur. They assembled in Prem Residency Hotel, Khamgaon. From there, they went to house of accused. Usha told her parents that accused persons used to beat her for balance amount of Rs.20,000/-. Usha's parents and relatives requested the accused not to beat Usha and assured to pay balance amount very soon.
6. It is the further prosecution case that in spite of that, the accused persons continued to ill-treat Usha. On 6.4.2011 Usha told her mother that 2-3 days earlier, her husband Harish accused no.1 and her mother-in-law accused no.3 beat her in a lane of her house and took her beating in the house. On 8.4.2011 accused Harish informed Usha's father Dhanraj that Usha had died. Dhanraj gave this message to Akash and Harish Purohit and requested them to go to Khamgaon and make enquiry about Usha's death.
7. On 9.4.2011 Akash, Harish and their friends came to Khamgaon and saw dead body of Usha in Government Hospital, Khamgaon. They saw injuries on the dead body of Usha and found that death was suspicious. Akash informed about the same to Dhanraj and as per his instructions, lodged report below Exh. 77 in Shivajinagar Police Station, Khamgaon. On the basis of the report, PSI Mapore registered Crime No. 22/11 under Sections 498-A & 304- B of the Indian Penal Code.
8. In the meantime, when on 8.4.2011 the deceased was taken to Government Hospital, Khamgaon by accused, Dr. Rajendra Chavan (PW.9) examined her at 4.40 p.m. an
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
