Bombay High Court
Vikas Kalu Pawar And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 2 May, 2023
Bench: Bharati Dangre
2023:BHC-AS:13638
1/4 14 IA-3838-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3838 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1139 OF 2022
Vikas Kalu Pawar & Anr. .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
...
Mr.Siddharth Gawande for the Applicants/Appellants.
Ms.P.N.Dabholkar, A.P.P. for the State.
Mr.S.A.Quazi for the Respondent No.2.
PSI Sunil Ugale, attached to Shirur Police Station, Pune, present.
...
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATED : 02nd MAY, 2023
P.C:-
1. The two Applicants are the Appellants, who have instituted
Appeal No.1139 of 2022, which is already admitted.
By the present Application, the Applicants seek suspension
of sentence imposed upon them under the impugned judgment
delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions
Case No.482 of 2019, when three Accused were tried for the
offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 306, 323, 498-A, 504
read with Section 34 of IPC. Pertinent to note that Accused No.2
expired during the trial.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 04/05/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 06/05/2023 02:59:55 :::
2/4 14 IA-3838-22.odt
On conclusion of the trial, Accused No.1, the husband of the
deceased and Accused No.3, her brother-in-law, came to be
acquitted for the offences under Sections 306, 323 and 504 of
IPC. They stand convicted for the offences under Sections 304-B
and 498-A of IPC and are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for
seven years under Section 304-B and on being convicted under
Section 498-A of IPC, they are sentenced to undergo
imprisonment of two years alongwith fne. Both the sentences
are directed to run concurrently.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Applicants, the learned
A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned counsel for Respondent
No.2.
The case of the prosecution, which surface through the
judgment of the trial Court, reveal that the marriage of Accused
No.1 was solemnized with Reshma, the daughter of PW 1 on
02/02/2016 and soon thereafter, they started residing at village
Nhavra, Taluka Shirur, District Pune.
The prosecution allege that after one month of the
marriage, the daughter of the complainant informed them that
all the three accused asked her to bring a sum of Rs.Two Lakh for
development of tyre remolding factory and for purchasing a
Bolero jeep. According to the prosecution, this was also told by
the deceased to her maternal uncle, who is examined as PW 4.
The money was not given, but the Accused were convinced and
the deceased was sent to her matrimonial house.
Another circumstance upon which the prosecution place
reliance is that, on 25/04/2016, when the complainant made a
phone call to his daughter, she informed that money was being
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 04/05/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 06/05/2023 02:59:55 :::
3/4 14 IA-3838-22.odt
demanded and all the Accused are assaulting her and not giving
her food. On the very same date, PW 1 received a phone call that
his daughter was dead.
Pursuant to the said incident, subject C.R. was registered.
3. On hearing the learned counsel for the Applicants, I have
perused the impugned judgment and the evidence that has
brought on record through the key witnesses, being PW 1 and
PW 3.
PW 1 in his cross-examination has categorically admitted
that the demand of Rs.2,00,000/- through a phone call made by
the deceased to his wife, is not mentioned in his statement given
to the police. Apart from this, PW 3, the mother of the deceased
also admitted in her cross-examination that the fact that her
daughter was subjected to harassment and put to starvation for
bringing the amount is not mentioned in the statement given to
the police. This omission is proved through the Investigating
Offcer (PW 6).
4. The learned counsel for the Applicants would vehemently
submit that these proved omission have created a huge dent in
the case of the prosecution, apart from the inconsistencies that
have featured through evidence of PW 1 and PW 3.
Pertinent to note that the Applicants are acquitted for the
offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC and in order to
establish the offence under Section 304-B, it would be necessary
to establish that before her death, the deceased was subjected to
cruelty or harassment, for or in connection with any demand of
dowry. It is only in these circumstances, Section 304-B can be
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 04/05/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 06/05/2023 02:59:55 :::
4/4 14 IA-3838-22.odt
attracted. The prosecution attempted to bring on record the said
aspect, but with the omissions and the inconsistencies in the
version of the witnesses, it cannot be said that the charge under
Section 304-B has been conclusively proved.
In any case, the evidence will have to be appreciated at the
time, when the Appeal is being heard, as the emphasis of the
learned counsel for the Applicants is upon the lacunae in the
prosecution case, which had featured through the evidence of the
key witnesses.
5. It is also submitted that the Applicants were on bail
throughout the trial and it is not the case of the prosecution that
they have ever misused their liberty. Since the Applicants have
been arrested after pronouncement of the judgment and are
presently incarcerated, in my considered opinion, the Appeal
deserve expeditious hearing.
But till then, considering the fxed term sentence imposed
upon the Applicants, sentence deserve to be suspended and they
deserve their release on bail. Hence, the following order.
: ORDER :
1. Interim Application No.3838 of 2022 is allowed.
2. The sentence imposed upon the Applicants vide the
impugned judgment stands suspended,.
3. During the pendency of the Appeal, they are directed to be
released on bail on furnishing P.R.Bond to the extent of
Rs.25,000/- each, with one or two sureties.
( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
M.M.Salgaonkar
