The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for evidence establishing a nexus between ill-treatment and the factum of death in cases of dowry harassment and suicide.

JUDGMENT

R.G.AVACHAT, J. - Both these appeals are being decided by this common judgment and order since they are interconnected. The Appeal (No.548 of 2003) has been preferred by the original accused Nos. 1 to 5 against the judgment and order dtd. 29/7/2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai in Sessions Case No.83 of 1999, convicting them for the offences punishable under Ss. 498-A and 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and resultant sentence. While, the Appeal (No.631 of 2003) has been preferred by the State for enhancement of the sentence.

2. Pending the appeals, the appellant Nos.1 and 2 in Appeal No.548 of 2003 passed away. The widow and son of the deceased appellant No.1 came on record to pursue the appeal.

3. The facts in brief giving rise to both the appeals are as follows.

4. Jyoti (deceased) was the daughter of PW1 - Rohidas. She had married the deceased appellant No.1 - Bapurao in 1993. On 1. 12.1998, Jyoti committed suicide by setting her ablaze. PW1 Rohidas therefore lodged FIR (Exh.53) alleging her husband Bapurao, mother-in-law Rukhminbai (deceased appellant No.2) and the sisters-in-law (Appellant Nos. 2 to 5) to have had harassed and ill treated the deceased Jyoti in connection with unlawful demand of dowry and thereby driven her to commit suicide.

5. Pursuant to the First Information Report (FIR) (Exh.53), a Crime vide CR No.189 of 1998 for the offences punishable under Ss. 498-A, 306, 304-B r.w. Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, came to be registered with Parali Vaijnath Police Station. The investigation of the crime took place. Statements of persons acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case were recorded. Scene of offence panchanama was drawn. The dead body of Jyoti was subjected to post mortem examination. On completion of the investigation, the appellants were proceeded against by filing charge-sheet. The learned J.M.F.C. committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai, framed the charge. The appellants pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined six witnesses and produced in evidence certain documents to bring home the charge. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, on appreciation of the evidence in the case, convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Ss. 498-A and 306 I.P.C. and therefore, sentenced to suffer two years rigorous imprisonment and pay fine of Rs.500.00 each on both counts. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

6. The learned Advocate for the appellants would submit that the deceased did not leave behind any suicide note nor did she made oral dying declaration. The deceased had happy married life. She was hyper sensitive. On the given day, the deceased wanted to visit her parental house. Her husband (deceased appellant No.1) was opposed to her proposal. She, therefore, got annoyed and set herself ablaze. The learned Advocate took me through the evidence on record to ultimately submit that the impugned judgment and order is unsustainable on facts and law as well.

7. The learned APP would, on the other hand, submit that the deceased committed suicide within seven years of her marriage. The evidence of the father of the deceased coupled with the evidence of the independent witnesses would undoubtedly suggest that the deceased was subjected to ill treatment in connection with the payment of outstanding dowry amount and illegal demand of motorbike. The learned APP reiterated the reasons given by the trial Court in support of the judgment of conviction. He, ultimately, urged for dismissal of the appeal against the conviction. He, even urged for enhancement of sentence.

8. Considered the submissions advanced. Perused the evidence relied on. Gone through the documents referred to. Let us appreciate the evidence let in by the prosecution.

Admittedly, the deceased Jyoti had married Bapurao (deceased) in 19