State Of Mah.Thr.P.S.O.Balapur vs Sanjay Ramrao Gotmare & Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 5982 Bom

                                                                                             CRI.APPEAL.311.03
                                                             1


                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
                                             ...

                            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 311 /2003

          State of Maharashtra 
          Through : Police Station Officer 
          Balapur, Tq. Balapur, Dist. Akola.                                                   ..   APPELLANT 

                     v e r s u s

1)        Sanjay  s/o Ramrao Gotmare, 
          Aged about 35 years, occu: Labour 

2)        Su. Prabhabai  w/o Ramrao Gotmare 
          Aged about  50 years, occu: Housework

          Both R/o  Chincholi (Ganu) 
          Tq. Balapur, Dist. Akola.                                                            .. RESPONDENTS

...........................................................................................................................
           Mr. S.B.Bissa,  Additional Public Prosecutor for appellant -State
           None for  respondents 
............................................................................................................................

                                                     CORAM: MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, J.

                                                     DATED:     16th August, 2017

ORAL  JUDGMENT: 


                     The     appellant-State   has   preferred   this   Appeal   against   the 

judgment and order dated 11th February, 2003 passed by the learned 1st Ad-

hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Trial No. 99/1999 thereby

acquitting the accused/respondents of the offences punishable under Sections

498A, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case, shorn of unnecessary

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

details are that, the complainant-Anand Motirao Tale (PW 5) is the resident

of village Shahapur, Tq. Khamgaon, District Buldana. Deceased Meena was his

third daughter who got married with respondent no.1-Sanjay in the month of

June, 1993. Respondent no.2-Smt. Prabhabai is the mother-in-law of deceased-

Meena. After marriage, Meena started residing at her matrimonial home

with the respondents at Chincholiganu. Out of the said wedlock, Meena

gave birth to one son and one daughter. On 19.4.1999 the Police Patil, by

name, Bhanudas Gotmare R/o Chincholi lodged a report with regard to the

death of Smt. Meena (Exh.29) by drowning into the well. On the basis of the

said report, accidental death (AD) Case No.17/1999 was registered by PW 8-

Nandkumar Kale, ASI. ASI Kale recorded the statements of the witnesses and

after completion of investigation, he filed the charge-sheet. During the course

of investigation, the post-mortem was conducted on the dead body of

deceased (Exh.47). P.H.C. Devidas Ingle (PW 7) proceeded to the place of

the incident and recorded the spot panchnama (Exh.38). He also recorded

the Inquest Panchnama (Exh.31) on the dead body of the deceased. On

20.4.1999 father of deceased visited the Police Station and lodged his

complaint (Exh.43). On the basis of said complaint PW8-Kale registered the

office vide Crime No.68/1999 u/ss. 498A and 306 of the IPC against the

respondents. The charge was framed by the learned trial Judge. After

conducting the trial, the learned trial Judge acquitted the respondents, as

aforesaid.

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

3. I have gone through the entire record with the assistance of

learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the respondents

remained absent though represented by Advocates.

4. The learned APP vehemently argued that the judgment of the

learned trial Judge is illegal and perverse, inasmuch as the learned Judge has

failed to consider the testimony of the witnesses PW 1-Manikrao Tale, PW 5-

Ananda Tale and PW 6-Malati Tale and has erroneously acquitted the

respondents.

5. In order to verify the contentions of the learned A.P.P. it is

necessary to go through the testimony of the relevant witnesses. According to

learned APP, deceased-Meena had died a suicidal death and not an accidental

one. In order to substantiate his contention, he has taken me through the spot

Panchnama as well as the post-mortem report. The prosecution examined PW

3-Vishnu Gavhne in order to prove the spot Panchnama (Exh.38). As far as

the testimony of PW 3-Vishnu, who is the Panch witness, stated that police had

come for enquiry at the Government well. The depth of the well was about 70

to 80 feet and the diameter was about 6 feet. The said wall was at a distance

of 10 to 15 ft. from the residence of respondent no.1-Sanjay. PW 3-Vishnu

stated that he noticed a pot kept near the well. He also noticed the dead body

of the wife of the respondent no.1. According to PW 3, he noticed that bucket

and rope were taken out from the well and the said bucket was used for

fetching water. PW 3 stated that the women in the village used to go to well

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

early in the morning for the purpose of fetching water. The said well was

constructed by stones and on the date of the incident, in the morning, he had

seen wife of respondent no.1-Sanjay on the well and while fetching water,

she fell in the well while fetching water.

6. On careful testimony of PW 3-Vishnu, it appears that on the

date of the incident deceased-Meena had gone to fetch water from the well

which was near her house in the early morning and while fetching water

Meena along with the bucket and rope, fell down in the well and due to

which her death occurred. Thus, the testimony of PW3 indicate that Meena

died an accidental death.

7. In order to prove the post-mortem report, the prosecution relied

upon the testimony of PW4-Dr. Dilip Mankar. He noted the following injuries

on the dead body of the deceased:

"(a) Abrasion over the right side of chest. It was measuring about 5 x 3 ½ inches, extending from right side of breast to sternal.

(b) Abrasion over the right thigh, on the anterior aspect, of size 6 x 2 inches.

(c) Abrasion over the left thigh, on the anterior aspect, of size 6 x 2 inches.

(d) Contusion measuring about x 2 inches, over the right thigh."

PW 4-Dr. Mankar observed fracture of shaft of femur on the right

side. According to him, the injured were ante mortem. He opined that the

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

cause of death is asphyxia due to drowning. He prepared the PM report (Exh.

41). According to PW4- Dr.Mankar, the injuries were not sufficient to cause

death. He admitted that by accidental fall in a well having 5 to 6 feet

diameter, 80 ft. depth construction by stones and bricks having iron angles

fixed in it, the injuries shown in column No.17 can be caused. Thus, the

testimony of PW4 is indicative of the fact that injuries were caused on the

body of Meena due to falling in the well which was 80 feet in depth, made

up of stones. Thus, the testimony of PW 4 further indicates that Meena might

have died due to falling in the well while fetching water.

8. As far as the testimony of PW5-Ananda Tale, who is the father

of the deceased is concerned, he stated that after marriage of Meena she

used to visit her parental house for Diwali purpose. At that time, Meena did

not suggest any type of harassment at her matrimonial home for about 2 to

43 years. However when respondent no.1 became Sarpanch he got addicted

to liquor and started harassing Meena. Whenever Meena used to visit his

house she used to tell that her husband was not allowing her to sleep in the

night and was asking her to press his hands and legs and used to beat her.

She further told PW5 that her mother-in-law used to awake her from the sleep

at dawn and used to ask to do the household chores. She told that her

husband and mother-in-law used to harass her mentally and physically.

According to PW5 on 3rd February, 1999 Meena visited his house for the

purpose of delivery. She gave birth to a female child. After about two months

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

she went to her matrimonial house. Meena was reluctant to cohabit with

respondent no.1. PW5 stated that he gave her an understanding and asked

her to go to her matrimonial home. Thereafter Meena went along with her

husband. PW5 stated that on 19.4.1999 Bhanudas Gotmare came to his

house in the morning and informed him that Meena was serious. Therefore

he along with his family members went to Chincholiganu. At that time, he

saw dead body of Meena was taken out from the well. Her blouse was torn;

her legs were fractured and abrasions were seen on her chest. Nobody

talked to him. He returned to his village. According to PW5 after about 5 to 6

months prior to the death of Meena, respondent no.1 demanded an amount

of Rs. 10,000/- from him and he had given an amount of Rs. 2000/-. PW5-

Ananda Tale then lodged the complaint against the respondent nos.1 and 2

(Exh.43). On careful scrutiny of testimony of PW5, it is noticed that PW5

admitted that the complaints made by Meena were trivial in nature and

therefore he had not lodged the report against the respondents. Certain

improvements were pointed out in his testimony to the effect that PW5 had

not stated before the police that in the month of December, an amount of Rs.

10,000/- was demanded to him by respondent no.1-Sanjay as advance. The

said improvement goes to the root of the case. Similarly, the version of PW 5

that respondent no.1-Sanjay had demanded an amount of Rs. 10,000/- and

he had given an amount of Rs.2000/-, also does not find place in the

complaint. The said testimony of PW5 makes it clear that there was no

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

demand from the respondent no.1-Sanjay with regard to the amount of Rs.

10,000/-. Thus, the testimony of PW5 indicates an improvement in his

version and the alleged harassment at the hands of respondent nos.1 and

2. Thus, the testimony of PW5 does not throw any light on the aspect of

alleged ill-treatment at the hands of accused nos.1 and 2.

9. The prosecution further relied upon the testimony of PW 6-

Malati Tale. According to PW6, who is the sister of the deceased, after

marriage Meena used to visit her parental home nearly thrice in a year. At

that time, she used to tell that her mother-in-law used to awaken her from

her sleep at 4.00 a.m. and used to ask her to do household work. She used

to tell her husband was not allowing her to sleep the whole night and asking

her to press his legs and hands and used to harass her after consuming liquor.

He also used to beat her. According to PW6, her sister was not subjected to

harassment for about a period of two years after the marriage. However

when respondent no.1-Sanjay became Sarpanch, he got addicted to liquor

and used to harass Meena. PW6 stated about the demand amount of Rs.

10,000/- from her father by respondent no.1. As already discussed above in

the testimony of PW5-Ananda Tale, father of deceased Meena, the said

demand was found to be an improvement made by him in the Court. It is

noticed that the statement of PW6 was recorded on 11.5.1999, after about

22 days from the incident. It is also noticed that PW 6-Malati Tale has made

an improvement with regard to her mother in law awakening her from sleep

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

at 4.00 a.m. and asking her to do the household chores. On going through the

statement of PW 6 it is noticed that her testimony shows improvements, she

has not told anyone about the said harassment at the hands of the

respondents. In view thereof, PW 6 is not found to be reliable witness.

10. So far as the testimony of PW1-Manikrao Take is concerned, he

is the brother of Meena and he has deposed that in the year 1996-97

respondent no.1 became Sarpanch and since then he was addicted to liquor.

His sister Meena used to tell him that after consuming liquor her husband

used to beat her and abuse her mother-in-law used to taunt her in a rather

sarcastic language. Her mother-in-law used to wake her from slumber at

4.00 a.m. He stated that Meena told her that her husband had asked her to

bring the amount of Rs. 10,000/-. He had given the amount of Rs. 2000/- to

her. It is noticed that PW1 had made improvements about the harassment by

her husband and mother-in-law for the remaining amount to Rs. 8000/-. PW1

admitted that from the dead body of Meena it appears to him that she fell in

the well before 6 to 7 hours and the villagers told him that while fetching

water his sister fell down in the well. The testimony of the PW2 is not of

much assistance to the prosecution case and is not found to be trustworthy

due to improvements made before the court.

11. On careful scrutiny of the testimony of prosecution witnesses,

particularly PW 3-Vishnu Gavhale, the spot Panchnama on the point of place

of the incident and the Medical Officer PW 4-Dr.Mankar, it is noticed that

CRI.APPEAL.311.03

Meena died an accidental death. It is not proved by the prosecution that she

died a suicidal death. As far as the allegation of cruelty is concerned, the

prosecution has failed to establish that the respondent nos.1 and 2 ill-

treated Meena, more particularly respondent no.1 for demanding an

amount of Rs. 10,000/- from his father in law and asking her to press his legs

and hands and not allowing her to sleep. The prosecution also failed to prove

that due to said harassment, Meena drove herself to take drastic step of

committing suicide by jumping into the well. The prosecution has failed to

prove any of the charges levelled against the respondents.

12. The learned trial Judge has rightly come to the conclusion that

Meena died an accidental death. In view thereof, there is no question of any

presumption as such under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act. It is well-

settled principle of law that if no irregularity or perversity or illegality is

noticed in the judgment and order passed by the trial court, the Appellate

court need not interfere in the matter.

13. For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal preferred by the State fails

and is hereby dismissed.

JUDGE

Sahare