Allowed

The State of Maharashtra v. Kisan Mariti Jadhav and Others

Bombay HC4 Oct 2004APEAL/885/1988

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal by State against acquittal in dowry harassment abetting suicide case. Bench held evidence insufficient to prove dowry demand and cruelty beyond reasonable doubt. Appeal dismissed maintaining acquittal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and order of acquittal of respondents dismissed. Appeal against acquittal stands dismissed.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Kisan Mariti Jadhav and Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶2

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 885 OF 1988

¶4

The State of Maharashtra.

¶5

.... Appellant.

¶6

Versus.

¶7

Kisan Maruti Jadhav, Age: 55, Occ.:Agriculturist.

¶8

Ambubai Kisan Jadhav, Age: 45, Occ.: Household.

¶9

Ramdas Kisan Jadhav, Age: 30, Occ.: Agriculturist.

¶10

Jaising Kisan Jadhav, Age: 32, Occ.: Service.

¶11

Namdeo Pralhad Jadhav,

¶12

Age: 27, Occ.: Agriculturist. .... Respondents.

¶13

Shri I.S.Thakur, A.P.P. for the Appellant.

¶14

Shri R.S.Kate for the Respondents Nos.2 to 5.

¶15

CORAM ; SMT.RANJANA DESAI, &

¶16

ABHAY S. OKA, JJ.

¶17

DATED : 4th October, 2004.

¶18

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Abhay S.Oka, J).

¶19

1.	By t	his Appe	al again	st ac	quittal, th	e State	of
Maharashtra	has	taken	excep	tion	to the	Judgment	and
order	dated	1st July	1988	passed	by the	learned	Addl.
Sessions	Judge,	Pune.	By	the	impugned	Judgment	and
Order,	the	learned	Sessions		Judge	acquitted	the

¶20

: 2 :

¶21

Respondents/Accused of the offence punishable under sections 306, 498A, and 304B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

2.	The deceased Padma	was the eldest daughter	of	Dinkar
Manahdeo	Kale (P.W.1),	who was resident	of	village
Nimone,	Taluka Shirur,	District Pune. Th	e	deceased
Padma	was married to	Accused No.3 Ramdas on	7th	June
1978.	The Accused	No.1 is the father-in-law	of	the
deceased	Padma. The	Accused No.2 is the	mot	her-in-law
of	the deceased Padma.	Accuse Nos.3 to 5 are	the	sons
of	Accused No.1.	The case of the prosecution	is	that
the	two sons and one	daughter were born to	the	deceased
Padma.	It is the	case prosecution that first	four	to
five	years the life	was smooth for her and		thereafter
the	accused persons	started putting f	orth	illegal
demands	and were pressurisi	ng Padma to go and	fetch	from
time	to time cash	amount and some articles	from	her
father.	Padma being	the eldest daughter of	her	father,
her	father used to	fulfil her demands. T	he	accused
demanded	an oil engin	e for installing the sam	e on	their
well.	The father of	Padma purchased an oil	engine	from
his	brother-in-law by	paying Rs.4000/- and hand	ed	over
the	oil engine to the	Accused. Thereafter the		Accused
persons	compelled Padma	to go to her father	and	bring
some	cash amount	for them for purchasing	a	bullock.

¶23

: 3 :

¶24

With	a vie	w to	prevent hardship to	Padma her	father
spared	one	of his	own bullock by	fixing its price	at
Rs.900/-.	The	Accused	No.1 took	the bullock	and
thereafter	did	not b	other to make	payment of the	price.
Lastly	the acc	used dem	anded a bag full	of Bajra.	When
Padma	came	to he	r father with the	said demand,	her
father	told he	r that	he was not in	a position to	supply
full	bag of	bajra bu	t he assured her	that a full	bag of
bajra	will be	given	at the time	of kharip	season.
Therefore,	Padma	had	to go back e	mpty handed to	her
matrimonial	home.	O	n the next day	her dead body	was
seen	floating	in the	well situated i	n the farm of	the
Accused	persons.	After	post-mortem de	ad body was	handed
over	to the	Accu	sed persons who	performed the	last

¶25

rites. The Police suspected some foul play and

¶26

investigated the matter further.

¶27

The defence of the accused seems to be that they maintained Padma very well. Padma had three school

¶28

going children. Their case is that they are very well

¶29

off and the allegation made against them are false.

¶30

4.	The	learned	A.P.P.	sub	mitted	that the	repeated
demands	made	by	the Accused	to	the	deceased Padma	have
been	established	in	evidence.	He	stat	ed that when	the
last	demand	made	by the	accused	to	the deceased	Padma

¶31

: 4 :

¶32

could	not	be	met	by	her	father	on	the	next	d	a	y her	body
was	found	in	the		well	which	is	situa	ted	in		the	property
of the		Respo	ndent.		He	pointed	out	that	there			was	no
reason	to		disbelie	ve	the	version	of	th	e fat	her		of	the
deceased.		He	a	lso	i	nvited	our		attent	ion		to	the
postmortem		no	tes	an	d t	he n	ature	of	ant	e-m	o	rtem	injuries
found	on	the	pers	on	of	the	deceased.		He			submitted	that
it	was		establis	hed	bey	ond r	easonable		doubt	t	h	at	there
was a	de	mand	of		dowry	made	by	the	Ac	cuse	d	to	the
deceased	P	adma	and		the	deceased	Padma		was	tre	a	ted	with
cruelty.		He	cr	itic	ized	the	approach		of	t	h	e	learned

¶33

Sessions Judge and submitted that the impugned judgment

¶34

and order is perverse.

¶35

5.	Shri		Kate,	the	learn	ed Counsel appeari	ng for	the
Respondents		supp	orted	the	i	mpugned Judgment	and	Order.
He sub	mitted	that	c	onsideri	ng	the evidence	on record	the
case	of	the	prose	cution	is	not proved.	He	submitted
that	even	as	suming		that	different conclusio	n can	be
drawn	from		the	evide	nce	on record, no	interference	is
permissible		in	an	appeal		against acquittal.	He	relied

¶36

upon various Judgments to which reference will be made

¶37

later on.

¶38

We have carefully analysed the submissions and we also gone through the evidence on record. The evidence

¶39

: 5 :

¶40

of	P.W.1	Dinkar	the	fathe	r of	th	e	deceased	discloses
that	for	the first	four	to	five	y	ears	of married	life,
the	deceased	Padm	a led	a	happy	li	fe.	Thereafter	the
Accused	sta	rted maki	ng dem	ands	to	de	ceased	Padma.	The
first	inciden	t of	demand	n	arrated	by	the	P.W.1 is	the
demand	for	an oil	engine.		He	stated	that	when he	came
to	know	about t	he said		demand	fro	m de	ceased Padma	, he
purchased		an oil	engine	fr	om	his	wife’s	brother	for the
price	of	Rs.4000/-.	He	st	ated	that	for	a period	of two
years	therea	fter th	e life	w	as v	ery	smooth	for	Padma.
After	two	years	Padma	came	to	him	and	stated that	she
was	being	ill-treated	by	the	Re	sponde	nts	and they	were
demanding	a	sum	of	Rs.10	00/-	for	purcha	sing a pair	of
bullocks.		He stated	that	at	that	time	he	was not	in a
position	to	pay the	said	am	ount.		He	stated that	he had

¶41

one extra bullock at that time. He settled the price of

¶42

the Bulloc	k in presen	ce of Padma	at Rs.900	/- and	the
said	bullock	was	handed	ov	er	to	the	accu	sed. H	e	stated
that	the	accused	did	not	pay	any	amou	nt	for the		said
bullock.		He	admitted	th	at	after	the		second inci	dent	of
demand	of	money	for	bull	ocks	the	Acc	used	were	t	reating
the da	ughter	nicely.	He	stat	ed	that	Padm	a	came to	him	a
day	before	the	incident		and		stated		that she		was
subjected	t	o ill-trea	tment	and	a	de	mand	wa	s made	by	the
Responden	ts-accused	for		full	ba	g o	f Ba	jra.	He		stated

¶43

that he told Padma that he will be in a position to give

¶44

: 6 :

¶45

Bajra after some time.

¶46

7.	In	the	examinat	ion-in-c	hief	itself		P.W.1		stated	that
his	brother	co	nveyed	to	him	the	infor	mation		that	dead
body	of	Padma	was fl	oating	in	the	well	of		Accused	No.1.
He	stated	that,	however,	he	did	not	go	to	the	well	at
that	time.	At	about	3.00	p.m	. Po	lice	ca	me	to	the
village	and	after	the	Poli	ce	contacted		him		he	went

¶47

towards the well and saw the dead body of Padma which

¶48

was taken out of the well.

¶49

8.	In the		cross-examination he		admi	tted	that	the
Accused	No.4-J	aisingh	is staying at		Loni-	Kalbhor		along
with	his wife	and	children since last	7	to	8	years	and
he	has sepa	rated	from his parents.	H	e	als	o	admitted
that t	he Accused	No.	5 was separated	from		his	parents	and
was	running a	gro	cery shop. He	fur	ther	stat	ed tha	t the
Accused	had a	greed	to repay the co	st	of	the	oil	engine.
He	denied t	he	suggestion that the	bul	lock		was	never
demanded	by th	e	Accused. He adm	itted		that	he	was
convicted	for	consu	ming illicit liquor.			He	stated	that
till his sta	tement was record	ed by the	Police, he did
not narrate	any of the incident	s to any	body.
9.	P.W.2 R	amrao	is a panch witne	ss	to	the	scene	of
offence	panchanama	.	He stated that	the	de	pth	of	the

¶50

: 7 :

¶51

well was 45 feet and there was a water in the well upto the height of 10 to 15 feet and the oil engine was

¶52

installed on the well for drawing water for irrigation

¶53

and drinking purpose.

¶54

10.	P.	W.2 further stated that two years prior to	the
incident	he	was called by P.W.1 Dinkar to his house	when
deceased	P	adma was present at that time. The	witness
further	sta	ted that P.W.1 informed him that Padma	was
demandin	g	some cash amount for purchasing	bullock.
P.W.1	sta	ted at that time that he was not in a	position
to	pay	the said amount to him. According to	P.W.2,
P.W.1	info	rmed him that he was desirous of giving	his
own	bu	llock and therefore, he requested P.W.2 to	settle
the	price	of the bullock which was to be given	to
Accused	N	o.1. He stated that the price was fixed	at
Rs.900/-		and Accused No.1 thereafter took the	bullock
and	the	Accused No.1 was supposed to pay the price	of
the	bullock.	At that time he did not pay	anything
before	him.	In the cross-examination he stated that	the
well	was	an old well and there were steps to get	into
the	said	well on the northern side. He stated that	on
the	mouth	of the well the stones are arranged in	a
sloping		condition in the tapering shape till the	water

¶55

level. He admitted that at some places inside wall is

¶56

protruding.

¶57

: 8 :

¶58

11.	P.W.3	is	Bhagchand	Kale	who	deposed	that	he	was
called	by	P.W.1	Dinkar.	He	stated	that	at	that	time
Ramrao	Kale	and	Accused	No.	1 were	present	.	He	stated
that a	sum	of	Rs.1000/-	was	demand	ed by	Padma	for	her
father-in-law	and	P	.W.1	was	unable	to	pay	the	said
amount.	He	stated	that	P.W.1	handed	over	his	bullock	to

¶59

Accused No.1 and the price of the bullock was fixed at

¶60

Rs.900/-.

¶61

12. P.W.4	is	Dr.M	achin	dra Sonalkar	who	performed	the
postmortem exa	mination	on	the	body of	the	deceased.	In
the examination-in	-chief	he		stated	the	nature	of
ante-mortem in	juries	on	the	body.	The	injuries	consist
of mostly	abrasions.		Ther	e is one	C.L.W.	over	right
front temporal	region	havin	g	size 1" x	1-1/2".	In	the
cross-examination	the	witn	ess	admitted	that	if a	person
falls in the	well	hav	ing	rough and	protru	ding	boundary
wall, the	injuries	refer	red	to in	the	postmortem	report

¶62

are not possible at one time but the injuries on the

¶63

frontal region are possible.

¶64

13.	P.W.5	is	PSI	Shank	ar Shiv	aji Jadhav	who was	at the
relevant	time		attached	to	Shirur	Police	Station.	He
investigated	the		offen	ce	by	recording	statements	of
various	witnes	ses.		In	the	cross-examination	he	stated

¶65

: 9 :

¶66

that the village Nimore is at a distance of 2 kms. from the well. He stated that the well is not constructed and it is uneven in shape.

¶67

P.W.6 Pandurang Salage is a Police Officer who recorded the missing report given by Accused No.1 at Shirur Police Station on 12th October 1987. He stated that the Accused No.1 informed him that there was a

¶68

domestic quarrel between the deceased Padma and her

¶69

husband on 10th October 1987.

¶70

Analysis of the evidence indicates that for the first four to five years after her marriage, the deceased Padma had no complaint about the ill-treatment at the hands of the Accused. The case of P.W.1 is that he purchased oil engine from his brother-in-law for a sum of Rs.4000/It is pertinent to note that the prosecution has neither examined his brother-in-law nor

¶71

produced any documents to show that the oil engine was

¶72

purchased by P.W.1 from his brother-in-law.

¶73

In so far as the controversy regarding the bullock is concerned, it must be noted that it is the specific case of P.W.1 that his bullock was handed over to the Respondent No.1 after fixing price at Rs.900/-. His grievance is Respondent No.1 has not paid the price of

¶74

: 10 :

¶75

the bullock. It must be noted here that even in ca	se of
oil engine, the case of P.W.1 is that the amount	of
price of the engine was not paid to him by the	accused.
The third and last incident of demand is one bag	of
bajra a day prior to the incident. It is pertinent	that
P.W.1 has not at all stated that who amongst	the
Respondents ill-treated deceased Padma. The d	eposition
of P.W.1 shows that in so far as the alleged cruel	ty is
concerned, he has not specified particular instances	of
cruelty narrated to him by his daughter. It is	thus
clear that there is hardly any evidence of any	cruelty
to his daughter. In so far as the abetment to	commit
suicide is concerned, there is no evidence at	all.
P.W.1 in his cross-examination admitted that even	after
he was informed that the dead body of his daughter	Padma
was floating in well, he did not go towards the	well.
Only in the afternoon when the Police came, he went	to
the site of incident where he saw body of Padma.	As
against this, on earlier day the Accused No.1 had	filed
a F.I.R. complaining that his daughter-in-law	was
missing. So far as the handing over of bullock	is
concerned, it is the case of the Respondents that	none
of them demanded any bullock nor the same was	supplied
to them. On the contrary the case of P.W.1 is tha	t the
price of the bullock was fixed at Rs.900/- in	presence
of Respondent No.1 who agreed to pay the	same.

¶76

: 11 :

¶77

Considering	the	nature	of	evidence	of P.W.1	it	is	very
difficult	to	come	to	the	conclusion	th	at	offences
punishable	under	section	306,	482-A,	and	304-B	read	with

¶78

section 34 of the IPC have been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

¶79

17.	We	are,	there	fore,	of	the	view		that	the	conclu	sions
which	are	drawn		by	the	learned		Ses	sions	J	udge	are
possible		conclusions	w	hich	can	be	drawn		on	the	basis	of
evidence.		Even	if	it	is	assumed	that		it	is	possible	to
take	some	other	view	of	the	matter,	it	is	not	at	all	a
ground		for	interfer	ence	in	an	app	eal		against	acq	uittal.

¶80

Therefore, the Appeal against acquittal stands

¶81

dismissed.

¶82

(Smt.Ranjana Desai, J.)

¶83

(Abhay S.Oka, J.)

The State of Maharashtra v. Kisan Mariti Jadhav and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Kisan Mariti Jadhav and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Kumar Jain Vs R.K.Gupta and Anr.

Vinay S.Ghatkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Prakash Hemandas Java Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr..

Jalinder Devidas Shinde. Vs State of Maharashtra.

Baban Shekha Bidgar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shri Vijay Vishnu Gangurde and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra