Bombay High Court
The State Of Maharashtra vs Nanasaheb S/O. Chandrakant Aargade And ... on 7 May, 2024
als71.2019
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
BY STATE NO. 71 OF 2019
The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Inspector,
Pathardi Police Station,
Tq. Pathardi, Dist. Ahmednagar. ...Appellant
(Original Complainant)
VERSUS
1. Nanasaheb s/o Chandrakant Aargade,
Age; 30 years,
2. Chandrakant s/o Shankar Aargade,
Age; 58 years,
3. Latabai Chandrakant Aargade,
Age; 52 years,
All R/o Aargade Wasti, Taluka Pathardi,
District Ahmednagar. ...Respondents
(Original Accused)
...
APP for the appellant/State : Mr. S.M.Ganachari
Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 : Mr. Joydeep Chattarji
...
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
Date of Reservation : 24.04.2024
Date of Pronouncement : 07.05.2024.
als71.2019
-2-
ORDER :
1. The instant leave application by State is with
prayers to permit it to file appeal against the judgment and
order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Ahmednagar dated 07.09.2017 in Sessions Case No.
185 of 2015.
2. In support of above relief, the learned APP pointed
out that the deceased was married to original accused No. 1
Nanasaheb. Whereas, accused Nos. 2 and 3 are her in-laws.
After 3 years of the marriage, accused persons started
harassing, and ill-treating the deceased. They consistently
harassed the deceased saying that she is unable to work and
she does not bear the child. They also harassed her on the
point of demand of Rs. 2,00,000/-, for purchasing a vehicle.
He further pointed out that getting fed up such ill-treatment
only deceased hanged herself on 19.10.2014 and even FIR was
lodged on the same day.
3. It is further submitted by learned APP that in
als71.2019
support of above case and charge six witnesses were examined
who are consistent about ill-treatment and demand. Apart
from relatives, even independent witnesses were examined.
But such evidence is not correctly appreciated. Accused being
solely responsible for death of Anuradha, they ought to have
been held guilty. There is improper appreciation of evidence
and erroneous conclusion and hence leave to file appeal is
prayed for.
4. Per Contra, learned Counsel for the
respondents/original accused pointed out that the
prosecution had miserably failed to establish the charge.
According to him, there are omnibus and general allegations
about ill-treatment and demand. There is no evidence of
specific nature of ill-treatment to the deceased and specific
instances as to when ill-treatment was subjected and exactly
by whom. Therefore, it is submitted that charge under Section
498-A of the Indian Penal Code apparently failed. Likewise, he
submits that even charge under Section 306 of IPC could not
be attracted to accused as there is no evidence regarding
inducement abetment. There being correct appreciation of
als71.2019
evidence as well as law, learned counsel prays to refuse leave.
5. Perused the papers. It seems that accused No. 1 is
husband of the deceased, whereas, accused Nos. 2 and 3 are
the in-laws of the deceased. Evidence shows that the
deceased Anuradha was married with accused No. 1, three
years prior to the incident. The incident of hanging is of
19.10.2014, therefore, the marriage between the deceased and
accused No. 1 must be around 2011.
6. The evidence of prosecution shows that the
accused persons were ill-treating the deceased on account of
her inability to do domestic work properly, for not conceiving
child and for not meeting demand of Rs. 2,00,000/- for
purchase of vehicle.
7. The father of deceased is examined as PW-2. One
Ashok, who is the friend of PW-2, is also examined as PW-4.
PW-5 seems to be the nephew of informant and the rest of the
witnesses are the panchas and the police officers.
als71.2019
8. It is noticed on being pointed by learned counsel for
respondent that PW2, 4 and 5 while under cross unable give
specific instances as to when there was demand and when
there was ill-treatment. They are also not highlighting nature
of ill-treatment. Allegations are about commenting on inability
to cook proper food and not conceiving. Allegations about
demand of money or vehicle but for whom and which vehicle
is also not clarified by any of the witness. Apparently
allegations are general and omnibus nature.
9. Moreover, deceased seems to have hanged herself
on 19.190.2014. There is nothing to show that on that day or
in proximity to such day there was maltreatment which
prompted deceased to hang herself. There is no material
suggesting creation of such circumstances, due to which
deceased was left with no other alternative but to hang
herself. Resultantly, required necessary ingredients being
palpably missing, no fault can be found in acquitted accorded
by trial judge. No case is made out on merit to grant leave.
Hence the following order :
als71.2019
ORDER
Application for leave to file Appeal by
State is dismissed.
[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE ]
JUDGE
mahajansb/
