The prosecution must provide specific instances of cruelty and direct acts of instigation to establish charges under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC; vague allegations are insufficient.

JUDGMENT :

Abhay S. Waghwase, J.

1. Convicts for offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC], are hereby challenging the judgment and order dated 30.09.2005 passed by Ist Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No. 101 of 2005.

PROSECUTION CASE IN BRIEF

2. In nutshell, case of prosecution is that, deceased Ashwini, i.e. daughter of PW2, was married to appellant no.1 five to six years prior to her death. Informant father set law into motion reporting that, one year after marriage, there was ill-treatment to deceased at the hands of husband, parent’s in law and sister-in-law on the count of not doing household work and for not giving proper honours to their son- in-law. Accused persons beat his daughter. Whenever she came, she reported the above treatment meted out to her. 8 to 9 months prior to her death also she had reported ill-treatment and harassment when they had all met in the marriage of informant’s nephew Pandurang. Ashwini reportedly left house of accused for gathering fuel wood, but did not return and on being searched, her dead body was found hanging to a tree. Therefore, vide report Exhibit 36, crime was registered and it was investigated by PW6 and accused came to be chargesheeted and tried vide Sessions Case No. 101 of 2005.

3. At trial, prosecution adduced evidence of as many as 6 witnesses and relied on documentary evidence like postmortem report, FIR, spot panchanama etc. After appreciating the evidence, learned trial Judge accepted the case of prosecution for commission of offence under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC and sentenced appellants to suffer imprisonment as spelt out in the operative part.

Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction, present appeal has been preferred.

SUBMISSIONS

On behalf of the appellants :

4. Learned counsel for the appellants would, at the outset, introduced the appellants that, appellant no.1 is husband, appellant no.2 is father-in-law, appellant no.3 is mother-in-law and appellant no.4 is sister-in-law. She further pointed out that appellant no.2 father-in-law is no more and therefore appeal stands abated as against such appellant.

5. Taking this court through the evidence of PW2, PW3, PW4 and PW5, she would submit that apparently case of prosecution is weak and does not meet essential ingredients for attracting any of the charge. She submitted that PW2 and PW5, who are parents, are levelling vague, general and omnibus allegations and are merely deposing about ill-treatment and harassment without quoting the instances or providing details as to, of what kind there was ill- treatment, when and in what form? She pointed out that their testimonies are also full of material omissions, inconsistencies and contradictions and in fact they both are not lending support to each other in spite of being parents of deceased. From their evidence, she questions that, it is suspicious also as to when they got knowledge about alleged maltreatment because, according to learned counsel, mother PW5 Salubai deposed about hearing from daughter whenever she came to paternal home, and she did not specify regarding her visits, whereas, father PW2 speaks of learning from daughter when they went to meet her. Thus, according to learned counsel, parents are not consistent. She pointed out that, even otherwise allegations are of trivial nature as they speak about not giving honour and not doing household work. Therefore, according to her, this itself would not amount to cruelty and does not fit in the legal requirements for attracting Section 498-A IPC.

6. She pointed out that apparently, from the evidence of parents, it is emerging that there is no unlawful demand also. She pointed out that in the entire married life, only two instances are quoted. Therefore also, she submits that, there is no continuous harassment which is contemplated by law. She pointed out that from their evidence, it is also emerging that there is gap of 9 months during wh