1 appln 4529-10 jpc/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4529 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Suhas Laxman mane and others .. Respondents Mrs. V. R. Bhosale, APP for the Respondent-State Mr. K. B. Sonwalkar, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 CORAM : N. D. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 25th January, 2011 P. C. 1. Heard Mrs. Bhosale, APP for the applicant State and Mr. Sonwalkar learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This is an application for leave to appeal against the order of acquittal dated 2/12/2008 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Satara in Sessions Case No. 120 of 2007. The accused were prosecuted for the offence punishable under sections 306, 489-A read with Section 34 of I.P.C. 3. Heard both the sides. Perused the impugned judgment and order. Part of the record and proceedings along with copies of deposition were made available by the parties at the time of hearing 2 appln 4529-10 of this application for leave. It is unfortunate that victim named Sadhana committed suicide after pouring Kerosene and set herself on fire in the house where she was residing with husband and a small child. It is not disputed that the incident took place in the night hours on 3.9.2006 and after 3 days she succumbed to the burn injury on 6.9.2006 at 12.30 p.m. in hospital. Admittedly, it was a case of death due to burns as per her dying declarations recorded on two occasions. These dying declarations are the material pieces of evidence and have been relied upon by the trial court during the trial of accused Nos. 1 to 3. 4. The accused No.1 is husband of deceased Sadhana and accused nos. 2 and 3 are parents of accused No.1. It is not disputed in at the material time, accused nos. 2 and 3 were residing in Mumbai. The incident took place at Maskar Wadi Satara. The F.I.R. came to be lodged on the complaint of PW-1-Vishnu father of deceased on 8.9.2003 i.e. after five days of the incident and two days after Sadhana’s death. After recording of the complaint of PW-1 the Police proceeded with investigation. There were three dying declarations of Sadhana recorded in the Hospital. All three dying declarations do not incriminate these accused persons for any of the charges. Since Sadhana died after five years of her marriage and it was a complaint of father of the deceased bride, the police were constrained to investigate into the complaint and 3 appln 4529-10 recorded the statements of brother, sisters and mother of the deceased and filed charge sheet for various offences punishable under Section 306, 498-A read with 34 of I.P.C. 5. Accused were committed to the Sessions Court for trial. Evidence was recorded and after hearing the parties, the trial court recorded his judgment and order of acquittal in favour of the accused. 6. All three dying declarations were relied on by the prosecution because they are in favour of the accused and did not speak a word against the accused but show that deceased Sadhana had herself committed suicide. It was in a fit of anger when her husband questioned her to stop beating her child and took away the child from her in another room. Dying declaration no doubt is an important piece of evidence, whether it is in favour of or against any person. It is not the case of the prosecution that these three dying declarations were given under coercion or against her wishes. There is no argument or any ground taken to that effect either before the trial Court or before this appellate Court. The circumstances also indicated that while recording one of such dying declarations, deceased’s mother herself was sitting by her side. Incident was reported to the relatives of deceased. They also do not suspect about the veracity of both these dying declarations recorded by the 4 appln 4529-10 Naib Tahsildar and the dying declarations recorded by the Police. Thus it is seen that the investigation started only after recording the statement of father of the deceased PW-1 on 8.9.2003 which is a complaint stating that his daughter was harassed and ill-treated by the accused at her matrimonial house. Except the allegations of harassment in a vague manner, there is no other evidence brought on record to implicate the accused husband and his parents that they are responsible for driving her to commit suicide. 7. All the aspects have been considered with minute details in the judgment by the trial Court, by proper evaluation of evidence and the law relating to the dying declaration and death of bride due to burns. The incident that happened to her has been explained by the deceased herself in her dying declarations and nothing remained unexplained about the incident that happened. The accused -husband himself rushed to save her and took her to the Hospital. One of the dying declarations recorded by the Naib Tahsildar speak about innocence of the accused. Other two dying declarations are also disclosing the same facts. 8. It would be necessary to quote certain observations made by the Trial Court in its its judgment impugned in this appeal. Which reads thus: “18. Learned APP for prospection relied on the 5 appln 4529-10 judgment reported in 2007 ALL MR (Cri) 2193 Suman Pralhad Ghodke Vs. State of Maharashtra and submitted that Hon’ble High court,Nagpur Bench observed that “deceased wife living with her husband and husband’s relative after her marriage. Hence, it was for them to explain her unnatural death. It was incumbent upon the accused persons to show as to why deceased wife was driven to commit suicide.” 19. There is no dispute about ratio laid down by Hon’ble high Court in the present Judgment. I think that deceased Sadhana had given cause of pouring kerosene on her persona and setting her ablaze in exh.26,34, 36. So in such circumstances it was not necessary for the accused to explain why she committed suicide. Moreover accused had taken defence that Sadhana was not tampered. Considering evidence, I also feel that Sadhana appears to be not tampered girl. 20. I am well aware of the fact that the delay in recording complaint is not fatal in each case, but it depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. In the present case, Sadhana succumbed to her injuries on 6.8.2006. Whereas complaint was registered on 8.9.2006. It is admitted fact that marriage of accused no.1 and deceased was love marriage. In cross examination of P@-1 it is brought on record that after marriage Sadhana P@-1 was not talking with her. Sadhana was also not visiting his house, after her marriage. Said fact goes to show that marriage of accused no.1 and Sadhana was performed against the wish and desire of PW-1. In such circumstances when there is inordinate delay in lodging report, then possibility of false implication due to deliberation cannot be ruled out. Complainant tried to explain said delay by giving reason that his mental condition was not proper and therefore, there was delay in lodging report. Said contention of the complainant is very hard to digest. Therefore, I think that as PW1 was 6 appln 4529-10 against marriage of Sadhana and accused no.1 and in such circumstance, said incident occurred, therefore, naturally PW-1 was having grudge against accused no.1 and his family members, so in this case delay in lodging F>I.R. Is fatal to the prosecution case. Complainant also contended that he had filed on application to Supdt. Of Police , Satara. P.W. 6 Namdev testified that before handing over said application to him, he had recorded complaint exh.16. Therefore, in my view complaint Exh.16 firstly came into existence and I also treated exh.16 as F.I.R. Therefore Exh.36 cannot be read in evidence as it is hit by Section 162 of Cr.P.C. 21. In view of my above discussion, I come to the conclusion that accused No.1 to 3 did not abet deceased Sadhana to commit suicide and they are not responsible for her death in any way. So, I record my finding to point No.2 in negative as not proved. 22. Point No.3: Section 498-A of I.P.C. reads as under: “498-A. Husband or relative of husband of women subjecting her to cruelty. _ whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman subjects such women to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. In this case Section 498-A(b) of I.P.c. is not attracted, or even there is no allegation that accused no.1 to 3 subjected Sadhana to ill-treatment on account of any unlawful demand. Therefore, in my view, there is no case under Section 498-A(b) of IPC. To attract section 498-A there must be ill-treatment of such gravity that deceased should be driven to commit suicide. While discussing point No.2, I had already referred all evidence which came on record. It does not show that there was any ill-treatment at the hands of the accused to deceased Sadhana to drive her to commit suicide. Therefore, I think that prosecution has 7 appln 4529-10 failed to prove charge under Section 498-A of I.P.C. against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.” 9. In the light of the above stated fact, the trial Court was right in discarding the allegations of harassment and ill treatment deposed by the relative witnesses. The judgment and findings of the trial Court are supported by sound reasons and no interference is called for. No illegality or perversity in the findings are found. Leave refused. 10. The application is rejected. ( N. D. DESHPANDE, J. )