The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's reliance on circumstantial evidence, inconsistent defences of the accused, and the application of section 201 of IPC in convicting accused no.1 for causing disappearance of evidence of the offence.

JUDGMENT :

Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.

1. The appellants herein are convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer Life Imprisonment by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.22 of 2013 vide judgment and order dated 24th August 2015. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellants have filed the present appeal.

2. Such of the facts necessary for the decision of this appeal are as follows:-

(i) The marriage of Machhindra - appellant no.2 - original accused no.2 was solemnised with Reshma on 4th March 2009. In 2010, the couple was blessed with a baby girl named as Tanishka at Ammi Hospital, Bhiwandi. That the occupation of the family was mainly trading in fish. Accused no.2 used to bring fish from Sasoon Dock, Colaba and Reshma and her mother-in-law were selling fish in the local market at Mankoli, Bhiwandi.

(ii) On 6th September 2012, Umesh - brother of Reshma received a telephonic call from his friend Sachin Mali that Reshma has been admitted in the hospital as she had accidentally fallen from the staircase and had sustained injury to her head. To verify the said information, he had called upon accused no.2 Machhindra who did not receive the call. He therefore, called upon his sister Reshma, the said call was received by her mother-in-law Shobha i.e. accused no.1 and she confirmed the news that Reshma had fallen from the staircase and had sustained injury to her head and therefore, was taken to the hospital but to no avail. She was declared dead on admission. The parents and relatives had seen that Reshma had no injury to her head and the story given by accused no.1 was doubtful hence, they lodged a report with the police on 7th September 2012 at 4.00 am on the basis of which A.D. No.113 of 2012 was registered.

(iii) On the same day, brother of deceased, PW1 Umesh lodged a report at the police station alleging therein that Reshma was subjected to harassment and ill-treatment at the hands of accused nos.1, 2 and all other relatives who were residing in the same household, on account of failure on the part of her parents to fulfill the demand of the accused and that Reshma has died a homicidal death in her matrimonial home. On the basis of the said report Crime No. 305 of 2012 was registered against the accused at Narpoli Police Station, Bhiwandi for the offences punishable under sections 302, 498A r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. At the trial, prosecution examined as many as 12 witness to bring home the guilt of the accused.

(iv) The case rests on the evidence of Umesh - PW1 - brother of deceased Reshma, PW3 - Sumitra Dhumale - Mother of Reshma to whom Reshma had disclosed about harassment and ill-treatment meted out to her, PW4 - Jitendra Dhumale - Cousin of Reshma, PW7 - Dyandeep Patil, PW8 - Dr. Jayashree Mhaske who has proved the post-mortem notes which is at Exh.51, PW 10 - Manoj Keni an independent witness and PW12 - Vilas Sanap - Investigating Officer.

3. PW1 - Umesh Dhumale is the brother of deceased Reshma and the first informant in the present case. He has proved the contents of the A.D. Report bearing No.113 of 2012 as he had reported to the Police Station. The said A.D. Report is at Exh.22 and the FIR is at Exh.23.

4. According to PW1, at the time of marriage of Reshma, the parents had given some gold ornaments to her. That she along with her mother-in-law was selling fish. That the accused were demanding money from his sister and since she refused to request her parents to shell out money she was being abused and assaulted. The same was disclosed to him during his visit to his sister’s house. He had expressed his helplessness to his sister on account of stringent economic conditions. He has also deposed that the maternity hospital bills were paid by his father which he could pay only after borrowing money as hand loan. That when Reshma attended the marriage of their younger sister Sushma she had no ornaments on her person and upon enquiry had