Raju Ramaji More vs The State Of Maharashtra
2018 Latest Caselaw 460 Bom

                                                                           210. appeal 865.14.doc

Urmila Ingale

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                               CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 865 OF 2014

                 Raju Ramaji More
                 C/9324, Nashik Road Central Prison                .. Appellant
                      Vs.
                 The State of Maharashtra                         .. Respondent

                 Mrs.Sonia Miskin, for the Appellant.
                 Mrs.G.P. Mulekar,  APP  for State.


                                        CORAM : SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.
                                                 AND M.S.KARNIK, J.

15th JANUARY, 2018

ORAL JUDGMENT ( SMT.

V .K.TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.) :

1. The appellant - original accused No.1 has preferred

this Appeal against the judgment and order dated 19/03/2014

passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mangaon,

District - Raigad in Sessions Case No. 25 of 2012. By the said

judgment and order, the Sessions Judge convicted the appellant

for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the

IPC. For the offence under Section 302, the appellant was

sentenced for life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/- IDRI for

210. appeal 865.14.doc

2 years. For the offence under Section 201 of IPC, the appellant

was sentenced for RI for 3 years and fine of Rs.1,000 IDRI for

one month.

The prosecution's case briefly stated is as under :

2. The marriage of the appellant with Vandana took

place on 07/05/2007. After the marriage, Vandana came to

reside in her matrimonial house at Kathetali in Poladpur Taluka.

Vandana was the daughter of P.W.3 - Dnyanoba Ganpat Kadam.

Dnyanoba was residing with his family at Kambesharwadi which

was about 8 k.m. away from Kathetali. About one year after the

marriage, the appellant started abusing and assaulting Vandana.

Vandana disclosed about the ill-treatment to her father.

Dnyanoba then along with relatives went to the house of the

appellant. The appellant apologized and assured that he will

behave properly. However, in 2009 again the appellant started

ill-treating Vandana. A meeting was held during which the

appellant again assured that he will behave properly. On

13/05/2012, the appellant assaulted Vandana, hence, Vandana

210. appeal 865.14.doc

lodged complaint against her husband i.e. appellant with the

police. The police called Dnyanoba. In the police station, the

appellant gave assurance of good behavior. The police sent

Vandana to the hospital at Poladpur as she was beaten up.

Medical treatment was given to Vandana. Again the matter was

settled and Vandana started residing with the appellant i.e. her

husband. It is the prosecution's case that in the night between

17/05/2012 and 18/05/2012, the appellant strangulated

Vandana and caused her death and thereafter to cause

disappearance of evidence, he hung the body of Vandana from

the beam in his house with the help of nylon rope. In the

morning of 18/05/2012, Dnyanoba was informed that his

daughter has hanged herself. Dnyanoba stated that his

daughter would not hang herself. Dnyanoba thereafter went to

the house of appellant. At that time, he saw that dead body of

his daughter was hanging and her feet were touching the

ground. One ladder was found by the side of the wall.

Dnyanoba again stated his daughter would not commit suicide.

Thereupon the appellant was called and the appellant stated

210. appeal 865.14.doc

that as his wife Vandana was consuming Gutkha - Goa and she

used to beg food from the neighbours, he committed her murder

by throttling with the rope and thereafter hung her body from

the beam. Dnyanoba lodged FIR. Thereafter, investigation

commenced. After completing of investigation, the charge-sheet

came to be filed.

3. Charge came to be framed under Sections 302, 201

& 498-A read with 34 of IPC against the appellant - original

accused No.1 and his mother who was the original accused

No.2. They pleaded not guilty to the said charge and the

defence of the appellant was that of total denial and false

implication. After going through the evidence adduced in this

case, learned Sessions Judge acquitted original accused No.2 of

all charges, however, convicted and sentenced the original

accused No.1 - appellant as stated in paragraph 1 above. Hence,

this Appeal.

4. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant

210. appeal 865.14.doc

and learned APP for the State. We have carefully considered

their submissions, judgment and order passed by the learned

Sessions Judge and the evidence in this case and for the below

mentioned reasons, we are of the opinion that the appellant

committed an offence under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC.

5. There is no eye witness in the present case and the

case is totally dependent on the circumstantial evidence. First

circumstance against the appellant is extra judicial confession

made by the appellant in the presence of P.W.2 - Harishchandra

Vitthal Pawar, PW.3 - Dnyanoba Ganpat Kadam and P.W.4 -

Ramchandra Narayan More. P.W.3 - Dnyanoba was the father of

Vandana. Dnyanoba has stated that deceased Vandana was his

daughter. Marriage of Vandana with the appellant took place on

07/05/2007. Thereafter, Vandana started residing with the

appellant in the matrimonial house. The appellant treated

Vandana properly for one year, thereafter, he started ill-treating

Vandana by abusing and beating her. His daughter Vandana

disclosed about ill-treatment to him. Then a meeting was called

210. appeal 865.14.doc

wherein the appellant apologized and assured that he will

behave properly. Again in the year 2009, the appellant started

ill-treating Vandana. Again meeting was held in which the

appellant assured that he will behave properly. On 13/05/2012,

Vandana lodged report against her husband i.e. appellant with

the police. The police called Dnyanoba. In the police station,

appellant gave assurance that he will behave properly. The

police sent Vandanda to the hospital at Poladpur as she was

beaten up by the appellant. Medical treatment was given to

Vandana. Again matter was settled and Vandana started

residing with the appellant. On 18/05/2012, Dnyanoba

received a phone call from one Captain More asking him to

come to the village Kathetali. Hence, he went to the said

village. On reaching village Kathetali, Captain More informed

Dnyanoba that his daughter has hanged herself. Dnyanoba told

him that his daughter would never hang herself. Thereafter

Dnyanoba went to the house of the appellant. At that time,

Dnyanoba saw dead body of his daughter hanging from the

wooden beam and her feet were touching the ground.

210. appeal 865.14.doc

Dnyanoba saw ladder by the side of the wall. Dnyanoba said

that his daughter will never commit suicide. Sunil More called

the appellant. Thereupon the appellant confessed that as his

wife Vandana was consuming Gutkha - Goa and used to beg

food from the neighbours, he committed her murder by

throttling her and thereafter hanged her. Dnyanoba then

lodged FIR.

6. P.W.2 Harishchandra stated that he went to the house

of the appellant and saw Vandana hanging from a wooden

beam. He saw feet of Vandana were touching the ground. He

suspected that it was not a case of suicide. Meanwhile, the

appellant was called in the meeting. In the presence of P.W.2,

the appellant was asked how Vandana died. Thereupon, the

appellant confessed that his wife Vandana was consuming

Gutkha - Goa and frequent quarrels took place between them

and because of that, he strangulated her with the nylon rope

and thereafter hanged her.

7. P.W.4 - Ramchandra has stated that the appellant was

210. appeal 865.14.doc

ill-treating his wife Vandana and hence, meetings were called

and he has attended two such meetings. He went along with

P.W.3- Dnyanoba to Kathetali. When they went to house of the

appellant, he found that dead body of Vandana was hanging

from nylon rope tied to the wooden beam and her feet were

touching the ground. They suspected some foul play and

thereafter the appellant was called. In their presence, Sunil

More asked the appellant what had happened. Whereupon the

appellant told them that he committed murder of his wife by

strangulating her and thereafter hanged her body from wooden

beam with the help of nylon rope.

8. The Supreme Court in the case of Narayan Singh &

ors. Vs. State of M.P 1985 Criminal Law Journal 1862 held

that extra judicial confession cannot be brushed aside saying

that it is a weak type of evidence.

Accepting the admissibility of extra judicial confession, the

Supreme Court in the case of Sansar Chand Vs. State of

210. appeal 865.14.doc

Rajasthan (2010) 10 Supreme Court Cases 604 has observed

thus:

"29. There is no absolute rule that an extra-judicial confession can never be the basis of a conviction, although ordinarily an extra-judicial confession should be corroborated by some other material. [ Vide Thimma and Thimma Raju V. State of Mysore

- (1970) 2 SCC 105 : 1970 SCC (Cri) 320 : AIR 1971 SC 1871, Mulk Raj Vs. State of U.P. - AIR 1959 SC 902 : 1959 Cri. L.J. 1219, Sivakumar Vs. State - (2006) 1 SCC 714 : (2006) 1 SCC (Cri) 470 : AIR 2006 SC 653 (SCC paras 40 and 41 : AIR paras 41 and 42), Shiva Karam Payaswami Tewari Vs. State of Maharashtra (2009) 11 SCC 262 : (2009) 3 SCC (Cri) 1320 and Mohd. Azad Vs. State of W.B. - (2008) 15 SCC 449 : (2009) 3 SCC (Cri) 1082 : AIR 2009 SC 1307."

In the present case, there is corroboration to the extra judicial confession from the medical evidence.

9. Another circumstance against the appellant is that

the witnesses have stated that feet of Vandana were touching the

ground. Not only P.W. Nos. 2, 3 & 4 have stated that feet of

Vandana were touching the ground but P.W. Nos. 6 & 8 have also

stated that the feet of Vandana were touching the ground. P. W.

8 has stated that the investigation in the case was given to him,

hence, he went to the spot. He saw the dead body of deceased

was found hanging from nylon rope and the feet were found

touching the ground. P.W.6 - Vithoba Shankar Gaikawad panch

witness to the spot panchanama has stated that spot of the

210. appeal 865.14.doc

incident was the room which is on the southern side of the

house. There was wooden beam to the roof. The dead body

was found hanging from the beam with the help of nylon rope

and the feet of the body were found fully touching the ground.

10. We have gone through the photographs. The

photograph Article 10 also shows the feet of the deceased were

fully touching the ground. In addition, the photograph Article

11 shows that a ladder was against the wall i.e. it was quite a

distance from the dead body. In fact, P.W.3 has also stated that

one ladder was found by the side of the wall. Thus, it was not

possible for the deceased to climb on the ladder which was

placed along with the wall and hang herself from the middle of

the room. The circumstance in which the body was found

clearly shows that it was not a suicidal death but a case of

homicidal death.

11. Medical evidence also shows that it is the case of

homicidal death. P.W.7 - Dr.Bhagyarekha Patil conducted the

210. appeal 865.14.doc

postmortem on the dead body of Vandana on 18/05/2012.

Dr.Patil stated that there were two turns of ligature marks of

nylon rope on the neck of the deceased. Abrasions and bruises

were found around ligature mark. According to Dr.Patil

deceased died an asphyxial death due to strangulation.

According to Dr.Patil deceased died a homicidal death. Dr.Patil

further stated that in case of throttling with the help of nylon

rope, the injuries noticed on the dead body are possible. On

seeing photograph Article 10 which shows that the feet of the

deceased were found touching the ground when she was found

hanging, Dr.Patil opined that it would not be a case of death due

to hanging. Thus, medical evidence also corroborates

prosecution's case.

12. All was not well between the appellant and the

deceased Vandana and there used to frequent quarrels between

them during which the appellant used to assault his wife

Vandana is further seen from the evidence of P.W.3 Dnyanoba

who was father of Vandana. He has stated that one year after

210. appeal 865.14.doc

her marriage, his daughter has complained about ill treatment

by the appellant due to which meeting was held and the

appellant apologized and stated that he will treat his wife

properly. Thereafter, in the year 2009, the appellant again

began ill-treating Vandana. Again meeting was held and the

appellant promised that he will behave properly. Dnyanoba has

stated that on 13/05/2012, Vandana filed a report against her

husband i.e. appellant with the police. Police then called

Dnyanoba to the police station. In the police station also the

appellant gave assurance that he would behave properly. The

police then sent Vandana to hospital as she was beaten up.

Medical treatment was given to Vandana. Again the matter was

settled and Vandana started residing with her husband i.e.

appellant. The incident has occurred just two days thereafter.

The motive for the appellant to commit crime is also seen from

the evidence of P.W.2 - Harishchanda and P.W.3 -Dnyanoba.

Harishchandra has stated that the appellant said that his wife

was consuming Gutkha - Goa and hence, frequent quarrels took

place between them. Hence, he strangulated his wife Vandana

210. appeal 865.14.doc

with the nylon rope. Apparently, the deceased was in the habit

of consuming Gutkha - Goa and also begging food from the

neighbours. This is seen from the evidence of P.W.3 -Dnyanoba

who was father of Vandana. Dnyanoba has stated that the

appellant confessed before them that as his wife Vandana was

consuming Gutkha - Goa and used to beg food from the

neighbours, he committed her murder. The evidence of

Dnyanoba shows that he has admitted that it is true that he had

persuaded his daughter Vandana not to consume Gutkha - Goa

and not to beg food. It appears that this was the motive for the

appellant to commit murder of his wife.

13. On going through the record, we are of the opinion

that the prosecution has proved its case against the appellant

beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, there is no merit in the

Appeal. Appeal stands dismissed.

 (M.S.KARNIK, J.)                           (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)