Megha 6_apeal_430_2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1391 OF 2021

IN

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.430 OF 2021

Namdeo Ramchandra Chormule

...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

….

Mr. Abhishek Avachat for the Applicant.

Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.

CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED: 17^th JULY, 2021.

P.C.:-

This is an application under Section 389 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of substantive order of

sentence imposed vide judgment dated 04/03/2020 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, in Sessions Case No.267 of

2018 and to enlarge the Applicant on bail.

2.

The Applicant was prosecuted for ofences under Sections

307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is the case of the

prosecution that the Applicant attempted to commit murder of his wife

by administering poison. The Trial Court relied upon the evidence of

1/5

Megha 6_apeal_430_2021.doc

the victim as well as the medical evidence and CA report and held the

Applicant guilty of ofences punishable under Section 307 the IPC and

sentenced to sufer rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years

and fne of Rs.10,000/- i/d. to undergo further rigorous imprisonment

for one year. The Applicant is also convicted for ofence punishable

under Section 504 of the IPC and sentenced to sufer simple

imprisonment for the period of two years.

3.

The learned counsel for the Applicant submits that there is

no material to connect the Applicant with the said crime. He submits

that the ofence would fall under provision of Section 308 of the IPC

and not under Section 307. He has relied upon the decision of the Apex

Court in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat,

(1999) 4 SCC 421 to contend that the prayer for suspension of sentence

should be considered liberally.

4.

Learned APP contends that there is cogent and conclusive

evidence to prove that the Applicant had administered poison to his

wife. He submits that the Applicant, who was released on bail during

pendency of the trial, had violated the terms and conditions of the bail

and came to be arrested on 08/03/2019. Learned APP further states

that considering the past conduct the possibility of the Applicant not

2/5

Megha 6_apeal_430_2021.doc

being available cannot be ruled out.

5.

I have perused the records and considered the submissions

advanced by learned counsel for the Applicant and the learned APP for

the Respondent-State.

6.

The crime against the Applicant was registered pursuant to

the FIR at Exhibit -18 lodged by his wife. The evidence of the frst

informant vis-a-vis FIR at Exhibit-18 indicates that the accused used to

suspect her character and would constantly quarrel with her. The victim

has alleged that on the relevant date the Applicant came home under

the infuence of alcohol. He abused her throughout the night. At

about 9.00 a.m. the Applicant threatened to kill her. He brought a

bottle of poison, which was in the house, sat on her chest and forcibly

administered poison to her. The frst informant was unconscious and

was shifted to the civil hospital -Solapur by her relatives. Her evidence

further indicates that even on previous occasion, in an attempt to set

her ablaze, the Applicant had poured kerosene on her person. Crime

was registered against him regarding the said incident but, he was

acquitted.

7.

The medical evidence as well as the CA report corroborates

3/5

Megha 6_apeal_430_2021.doc

the statement of the victim. The evidence of PW4 -Dr. Dhadake

indicates that the frst informant was brought to the hospital with a

history of administering poison. She was admitted in the hospital and

treated for poisoning by Delta Methrine. The investigating Ofcer had

seized the bottle, allegedly containing the poison, in presence of

panchas and referred the same as we