The State Of Maharashtra vs Sanjay Badgujar And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 6884 Bom

                                                           Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002
                                               1


                     IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
                 APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 211 OF 2002

          The State of Maharashtra,
          Through Police Station Bhadgaon,
          District Jalgaon.                                  ....Appellant.

                  Versus

1.        Sanjay Mohan Badgujar,
          Age 26 years,

2.        Hiralal @ Vijay Mohan Badgujar,
          Age 24 years,

3.        Smt. Radhabai wd. Mohan Badgujar,
          Age 65 years,

4.        Rambhabai w/o. Vishwanath Pawar,
          Age 32 years,

          Residents of Pimparkhed Police
          Station Bhagdaon Dist. Jalgaon.                    ....Respondents.


Mr. S.J. Salgare, APP for appellant/State.


                                   CORAM       :   T.V. NALAWADE AND
                                                   S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.

                                   DATED   :       September 07, 2017.


JUDGMENT : [PER T.V. NALAWADE, J.]

.                 The appeal is filed by the State to challenge the decision

of acquittal given by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge,

Jalgaon in Sessions Case No. 229/1998. The respondents/accused

were tried for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 304-B,

alternatively section 306 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code ['IPC' for

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

short] and section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Both the sides are

heard.

2. Deceased Ujwala was daugther of first informant Pratap

Badgujar. She was given in marriage to respondent No. 1 - Sanjay

on 21.4.1998. Pratap hails from village Sakali and respondents hail

from village Pimparkhed, Tahsil Bhadgaon. It is the case of

prosecution that in the marriage dowry amount of Rs. 41,000/- was

given to the husband by the first informant and gold and silver

ornaments were gifted as Stridhan [ fL=/ku ] to the deceased. It is

contended that household articles and one steel cabinet were also

given.

3. Respondent No. 1 - Sanjay is husband of deceased,

respondent No. 2 is brother of Sanjay, respondent No. 3 is mother of

Sanjay and respondent No. 4 is married sister of Sanjay. It is the

case of State that after the marriage on 3-4 occasions deceased had

visited the house of parents and she had disclosed that the husband

was asking her to bring Rs.25,000/- as he wanted to develop his

cloth business. It is the case of State that the deceased had

disclosed that the husband was asking for this amount as dowry and

so, the first informant had informed that entire dowry amount was

given. It is the case of State that the deceased used to disclose that

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

all the accused were harassing her and on petty counts they were

giving abuses to her and they were giving beating to her. On last

occasion the deceased was brought to parents' house on 7.8.1998

for Rakshabandhan and on that occasion also deceased had

disclosed that respondents were asking her to bring Rs.25,000/-

from her parents. She had disclosed that even the sister of husband

was harassing her and she was giving instigation to others after

coming to the place of her husband occasionally. The deceased had

expressed that fear was developed in her mind that accused would

do something to her life. The deceased was taken back to

matrimonial house on 12.8.1998 by Vijay, brother of accused No. 1.

The first informant had informed to Vijay that they were trying to

make arrangement of some money and they should not give

illtreatment to the deceased. When the deceased was returning to

matrimonial house, she was crying.

4. On 18.8.1998 at about 4.00 p.m. the first informant

received message that Ujwala was dead. The first informant went to

Pimperkhed with his relatives. The dead body was lying in the

matrimonial house and there was smell of poison to dead body and

particularly to the mouth. When P.M. was conducted and last rites on

the dead body were completed, the first informant went to police

and gave report on 19.8.1998. The crime at C.R. No. 61/1998 for

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

aforesaid offences was registered in Bhadgaon Police Station. The

death took place due to poison endosulfan. The boxes of two

insecticides, endosulfan and monocrotophos were found in the

matrimonial house of the deceased. The statements of relatives of

the deceased on parents' side and others came to be recorded and

the chargesheet came to be filed for aforesaid offences. The

prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses including the

Investigating Officer. The defence also examined some witnesses to

create a probability that the deceased had consumed the insecticides

accidentally. Some record like letters written by the deceased and

her relatives on parents' side are produced by defence and they are

at Exhs. 65 to 70. The letters were produced to show that there was

no harassment to the deceased and at no time, there was

correspondence showing that the demand of Rs. 25,000/- was made

by the accused persons from the parents of the deceased. The Trial

Court has considered all this material. The Trial Court has held that

the demand of dowry is not proved and the illtreatment is also not

proved.

5. It is not disputed that the death took place due to

poisoning. There is C.A. report and there is also P.M. Report. The

case of the accused that the deceased probably consumed

insecticide in the field on that day does not appear to be probable in

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

nature as the boxes of insecticides were recovered from the

residential place and the evidence is given by prosecution to show

that the deceased was present alone in the house when one witness

of prosecution had visited the matrimonial house of the deceased on

18.8.1998. In view of these circumstances and as the death took

place within few months of the marriage, it was necessary for the

prosecution only to prove that there was illegal demand of dowry

from the accused persons and there was illtreatment to force that

demand.

6. Pratap (PW 1), father of the deceased has given

evidence on the disclosures made by the deceased and the F.I.R. is

proved in his evidence as Exh. 39. Though he has tried to say that

there was demand of Rs.25,000/- from the accused, his evidence in

cross examination shows that he has tried to avoid to admit many

things. It is suggested to him that he had taken hand loan from one

Dattu Badgujar and wife of Dattu Badgujar is elder sister of his wife.

It is suggested to him that Dattu Badgujar used to ask the deceased

to convey message to first informant - Pratap and probably, Dattu

Badgujar had harassed her. Pratap has admitted that he had taken

hand loan from Dattu. But he has denied other suggestions. He did

not give explanation as to why he did not report the incident to

police on the same day i.e. on 18.8.1998.

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

7. The evidence of Pratap and admitted circumstances show

that every time, whenever parents of deceased had requested the

accused to send the deceased to parents house to attend some

function or for other reasons like illness in the family, the accused

had sent the deceased to the parents house. She had stayed there

on every occasion for few days and this happened during short

period of married life of four months. If as per Pratap, he had given

entire dowry amount, there was no question of accused asking

amount as a dowry. In the cross examination, he has admitted that

the accused own 12-15 Acres of irrigated agricultural land and they

were taking crops like Jawar, cotton and other crops. Thus, on one

hand, he was required to take loan from relative Dattu for marriage

expenses and on the other hand, the financial condition of the

accused was good as they were having huge agricultural land which

had facility of irrigation. It can be said that as the deceased had

taken poison, Pratap being father, must have had some suspicion

and so, he made allegations of aforesaid nature against the accused

persons. There can be many reasons for consuming poison,

committing suicide. When a girl aged about 19 years is given in

marriage and she finds that she is not able to cope herself with the

new conditions of life or is not able to adjust in the family of

husband and the parents insist that she should live there, such thing

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

can happen. The circumstance that the deceased was crying when

she left the parents' house for matrimonial house a week prior to the

date of incident creates such probability.

8. Gumfabai (PW 2), mother of deceased is examined by

prosecution and her evidence is similar to the evidence of Pratap.

Ratnabai (PW 7) is sister of Gumfabai. She is resident of

Pimperkhed, village of respondents. Her evidence shows that she

used to see Ujwala by visiting her matrimonial house. Her evidence

shows that on 18.8.1998 as mother in law of deceased and this lady

were to go to the place of relative she had visited the matrimonial

house of the deceased at 11.00 a.m. She has deposed that the

deceased was present in the house, but she was alone and her

mother in law had gone to the field. Thus, at about 11.00 a.m. she

had met Ujwala, but she did not notice anything strange or

abnormal. If some incident had taken place on 18.8.1998 in which

harassment was caused to the deceased, the deceased would have

narrated such incident to this witness. This did not happen. Other

evidence given by this witness is similar to the evidence given by

parents of deceased.

9. The remaining evidence of prosecution shows that

accused No. 1 immediately contacted Police Patil of village and then

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

the report was given to police station about the incident. The steps

which are expected from family members were taken by accused

and even the news was reached to the parents of deceased. This

conduct of the accused cannot be ignored. It can be said that on

18.8.1998 no action was taken by Pratap due to such conduct.

10. In the evidence of defence witness Dattu Badgujar (DW

3), it is brought on the record that there was correspondence

between him and Pratap. He is friend of Pratap. He has produced

and proved the letters sent by Pratap to accused No. 1 as Exhs. 65

and 66. There is one more letter which was sent to accused No. 1 by

Pratap which was admitted by Pratap himself in his evidence at Exh.

42. This letter shows that the first informant had no grievance and

he was believing that his daughter was also happy in the

matrimonial house. There is a letter of deceased at Exh. 67 which is

proved in the evidence of DW 3. It is addressed to mother. In this

letter she had expressed that she was happy in the matrimonial

house. There is more correspondence of the relatives at Exhs. 68, 69

and 70 and this correspondence also does not show that there was

problem for deceased from the accused. On the contrary, Exh. 68,

shows that family members of Pratap had admitted that Dattu had

helped them by giving money and his family owed money to Dattu.

Cri. Appeal No. 211/2002

11. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the Trial Court

has held that there is no convincing evidence to prove that there

was demand of dowry from the accused and for that, there was

illtreatment. Due to these circumstances, it is not possible to draw

inference that it is a suicide committed due to the illtreatment or it is

a dowry death. It is not possible to use the provisions of sections

113-A and 113-B of the Evidence Act in the present matter. This

Court holds that the Trial Court has not committed any error in

giving the decision of acquittal. In the result, the appeal stands

dismissed.

       [S.M. GAVHANE, J.]               [T.V. NALAWADE, J.]




ssc/