Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Dalveer Bhandari, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No. 187 of 1991 dated 09.03.2001. The appellant (original accused no. 1) and his parents (original accused nos. 2 and 3) were alleged to have committed offences punishable under sections 498A, 306 and 109 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC'). The learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Beed convicted the appellant under section 498A IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/-, in default whereof to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant was also convicted under section 306 IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months. Original accused nos. 2 and 3 were, however, acquitted by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Beed.

9. On 9.10.1989 at about 6:15 p.m., Vasant P.W.8, father of the deceased, received a telegram to the effect "Lata burnt seriously. Do not come with Rohit for his insecurity". The telegram was signed by one Dodsay. In response to the telegram, the parents of the deceased rushed to Beed. They reached Beed at 2.15 a.m. on 10.10.1989. They saw the completely burnt dead body of the deceased in the hospital.

10. The deceased, because of constant mental torture caused by the appellant, decided to put an end to her life. On 9.10.1989 at about 2.30 p.m. at Dhondipura, Beed, the deceased committed suicide by setting herself on fire.

12. The Investigating Officer prepared inquest panchnamma Exh. 16 of the dead body of the deceased on 10.10.1989. He prepared spot panchnamma Exh. 29. The deceased had committed suicide in the kitchen. The Investigating Officer sent the dead body for autopsy. The autopsy was performed on the dead body of the deceased on 10.10.1989. The deceased had 100% burns. The charge sheet was submitted against the appellant and his parents in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Beed. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Beed committed the original accused to the Sessions Court, Beed to stand their trial.

21. The appellant, aggrieved by the judgment of the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, preferred an appeal before the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad Bench. The High Court correctly analyzed the entire evidence on record and came to a clear finding that the prosecution has established the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed and the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Beed was confirmed. The appellant, aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, preferred this appeal.