PPD
1
APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.964 OF 2005
[THROUGH JAIL]
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1055 OF 2011
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.964 OF 2005
Rameshchandra Dwarkaprasad ]
Gupta, Convict Prisoner No.C/2770, ]
Kolhapur Central Prison. ] ..Appellant
[Orig.Accused]
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ] ..Respondent
....
Smt. Rohini Dandekar, Advocate (appointed) for the Appellant.
Mrs. S.V. Gajare - Dhumal, APP for the Respondent - State.
....
CORAM : SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, &
A. R. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 05th DECEMBER, 2012 JUDGMENT: [PER A. R. JOSHI, J.]
1. Heard rival submissions on this Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant/orig.accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 11 th January, 2005 1 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 ::: 2 APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No.122 of 2004. By the said judgment and order, the appellant/accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer imprisonment for six months.
2. The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is as under :-
Appellant/accused along with his wife Usha (since deceased) and his three children was residing together at Jogeshwari. PW-1 Mrs. Urmila Sharma was his neighbour. PW-2 Vishnu Tak was also a neighbour of appellant/accused. PW-4 Bhjarat Jaiswal was his earlier neighbour when appellant/accused along with his family was staying at other place. PW-3 is Chandan Gupta, a young son of appellant/accused. Said PW-3 Chandan Gupta was then aged 13 years at the time of the incident.
3. Appellant/accused was doubting the character of his wife who used to do some minor labour work. He was doubting 2 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 ::: 3 APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc that his wife Usha @ Kalawati (since deceased) had illicit relations with one Bhujarath Jaiswal (PW-4). On that count, there used to be quarrels between appellant/accused and his wife and at times appellant was assaulting his wife. This factum of quarrel between the couple was known to the neighbours of appellant/accused.
4. The incident occurred at about 10:15 a.m. on 6 th October, 2003 when the accused came from outside and when his wife Usha and his son Chandan were present at home, he inflicted knife blows on the chest and other parts of the body of Usha. Usha sustained severe bleeding injuries. The assault was witnessed by PW-3 Chandan - son of the accused and victim.
Later part of the incident i.e. victim Usha lying in front of her house in an injured condition and accused leaving the spot was witnessed by PW-2 Vishnu Tak a neighbour of appellant/accused.
Injured woman was taken to the hospital for treatment. Police recorded the statement of PW-2 Vishnu Tak which was treated as First Information Report (Exh.16). It was recorded at about 2:00 p.m. on that day. It is also the case of prosecution that PW-3 3 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 ::: 4 APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc Chandan Gupta - son of appellant, after witnessing the incident rushed to the police station and brought one police constable with him. However, on reaching back he did not see his injured mother as by that time she was removed from the place for medical treatment. Chandan narrated the incident to other persons and also to PW-2 Vishnu. He also narrated the incident to the police. He found his father (appellant/accused) in the said locality on the same afternoon and reported the police and accordingly appellant/accused was arrested at 3:00 p.m. on the same day. His blood stained clothes were recovered.
5. Initially the victim Usha was alive while being taken to hospital. At the hospital, she gave the history as to assault by her husband but within a short-while she succumbed to the injuries.
Then the FIR of PW-2 Vishnu Tak was recorded, as mentioned above, and investigation started. Inquest panchnama was done on the dead body of the victim. Even spot panchnama was conducted after visiting the scene of offence i.e. house of the accused. As mentioned earlier, appellant/accused was put under arrest at 3:00 p.m. on the same day and his blood stained clothes 4 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 ::: 5 APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc were recovered. Seized articles were sent for chemical analysis.
On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the matter was committed to the Court of Sessions. Sessions Case was heard and disposed of by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay convicting the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. This is the judgment and order which is challenged in the present appeal.
6. As we have gone through the substantive evidence of prosecution witnesses and mainly that of PW-3 Chandan Gupta, PW-2 Vishnu (first informant), and PW-4 Bhujarat Jaiswal, in our considered view there is overwhelming evidence incriminating against the appellant/accused, more so his young son - aged about 13 years (PW-3 Chandan Guptal) has completely deposed against him as to witnessing the incident of assault and then finding appellant/accused and handing him in the custody of police. There is nothing brought on record during the cross-
examination of PW-3 Chandan Gupta and other witnesses so as to dilute the case of prosecution.
5 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 ::: 6 APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc
7. We have also gone through the substantive evidence of PW-4 Bhujarat Jaiswal. He deposed regarding his acquaintance with the family of appellant/accused and at occasions his visits to the house of appellant/accused for chitchatting and taking tea. Said witness further deposed that due to such visits appellant/accused had entertained a suspicion regarding some relations between said PW-4 Jaiswal and the wife of appellant/accused. Such suggestions were put to PW-4 Jaiswal during his cross-examination. However, in answer to questions while recording statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., appellant/accused had categorically denied that he had entertained a suspicion regarding illicit relations between PW-4 Bhujarat Jaiswal and his wife. However, he did admit that he was against the visits of his wife to the house of PW-4 Jaiswal, and as such there used to be disputes and quarrels between him and wife Usha.
8. During the arguments, it is tried to submit on behalf of the appellant by learned Advocate Smt. Rohini Dandekar appointed through Legal Services Committee that 6 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 ::: 7 APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc appellant/accused had not intended to kill his wife and in fact it was the grave and sudden provocation that had prompted him to assault his wife. Though this argument was advanced, there was no much force in the same, inasmuch as, there was nothing brought on record so as to so gravely provoke the appellant/accused to commit the offence of assaulting his wife on the chest. In this context, the injuries sustained by the victim are self-explanatory. Dr. Rajaram Marathe (PW-7) conducted the postmortem on the deceased and the injuries observed by him are recorded by him in the postmortem notes, which are detailed as under :
(1) stab wounds 3 cm x 1 cm by cavity deep. Single edged on right anterior axillary line 6 space. (2) stab wound 1.5 cm x 1 cm cavity deep single edged on right nipple line 8th space. (3) slicing incised wound on right thumb terminal phalynx 3 cm.
(4) incised wound 5 cm on left shoulder.
. All the above injuries were antemortem. According to
Doctor the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage following unnatural injuries.
7 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 ::: 8 APEAL.964-05JUDGMENT.doc
9. In any way, considering the overwhelming material available on record, it cannot be said that the learned Sessions Judge had erred in coming to the conclusion of guilt of the appellant/accused. In other words, there is nothing to interfere with the judgment and order, and hence there is no merit in the present appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed and disposed of. Criminal Application No.1055/2011 is also disposed of as infructuous.
10. This judgment and order be communicated to the appellant who is presently lodged in jail, through concerned jail authorities.
(A. R. JOSHI, J.) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.) 8 / 8 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:54 :::