1 Cri.Appln.No.1053/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1053 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra ... APPLICANT VERSUS Balu @ Laxman Subhash Tajane & ors. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri G.R. Ingole, A.P.P. for the applicant Shri N.G. Shah, Advocate holding for Shri N.S. Ghanekar, Advocate for respondents ..... CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 13th September, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. Perused application and the record. Leave to challenge the verdict of acquittal of the accused of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code delivered by learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Sangamner in Sessions Case No.34/2008 on 11.11.2010 is sought by the State. 2. One Sunita, wife of the accused No.1 Balu @ Laxman Tajane and daughter-in-law of the co-accused Subhash Tajane and Smt. Sulochana Tajane, died around 6.00 a.m. on 2.6.2008 while 2 Cri.Appln.No.1053/2011 under treatment at Dr. Tambe’s hospital at Sangamner. A.D.R. No. 30/2008 under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code was registered in respect of the death of Sunita at Sangamner City Police Station. Her body was removed to Sangamner Cottage Hospital. Inquest over her body was held and post mortem examination of the body was done. Dr. Bhaskar Madhavrao Bhavar, Medical Officer, Cottage Hospital, Sangamner did the post mortem examination in the morning of 2.6.2008. He found no external injuries on the body of the deceased, but noticed greenish liquid which he smelled as unknown poison. According to Dr. Bhavar, Sunita died as a result of asphyxia and the reason for it was swallowing of unknown poison. Viscera collected from the body of the deceased Sunita was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for further scientific investigation. 3. Father of the deceased Sunita – P.W.1 Sampat Bankar, in meanwhile, lodged the complaint with Sangamner City Police Station. He made a statement before the police that Sunita was married to the accused No.1 Balasaheb Tajane on 7.4.2007 and Sunita cohabited with her husband at Kasarwadi, and for first two months of the marriage, she was treated nicely. According to him, his daughter Sunita started complaining about the ill-treatment at the hands of her parents-in-law, the accused No.2 Subhash and 3 Cri.Appln.No.1053/2011 accused No.3 Smt. Sulochana, and regarding physical violence at the hands of her husband, the accused No.1 Balu. He further revealed that, her husband demanded Rs.20,000/- for purchase of cows, while his deceased daughter was pregnant, and this amount was paid by him, and his daughter had delivered a male child thereafter. However, he added that the ill-treatment continued, and he had received the call from his daughter some 20 to 22 days prior to the incident that the ill-treatment had increased and there was a demand of money for meeting the cost of cattle shed; he, therefore, met the accused and assured them of the payment and in meanwhile asked them not to harass his daughter Sunita. 4. According to him, he received the telephone call from one Popat Pawbake around noon time on 1.6.2008 that his daughter Sunita had consumed poison and was admitted to Dr. Tambe’s hospital and, therefore, he rushed to Tambe’s hospital and was by the side of his daughter while she was being treated there. He then disclosed the fact of the demise of his daughter at Dr. Tambe’s Hospital around 6.00 p.m. on 2.6.2008. Crime was registered against the accused at C.R. No.109/2008 under Sections 498-A, 306, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The accused were arrested. 4 Cri.Appln.No.1053/2011 5. In course of the investigation, the police collected advance death certificate and visited the spot where the deceased was found lying at her matrimonial home. Nothing incriminating was seized therefrom. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and on completion of the investigation, the accused were charge sheeted before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sangamner on 27.8.2008. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions at Sangamner, District Ahmednagar in due course. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges framed against them under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code before the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Sangamner on 3.1.2009. 6. The prosecution examined P.W.1 Sampat Bankar, the complainant; P.W.2 Hari Abhang, panch to the inquest panchanama, P.W.3 Bharat Bankar; P.W.4 Bansi Bankar; P.W.5 Ramnath Shinde; P.W.6 Popat Pawbake; P.W.7 Keshav Bhangare, A.S.I.; P.W.8 Dr. Bhaskar Bhavar, Medical Officer and P.W.9 Chandrakant Kshatriya, investigating officer. Submissions of the rival parties were heard by the learned trial Court and upon considering those submissions in light of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned trial Court concluded that it was not 5 Cri.Appln.No.1053/2011 the case of suicide by consumption of poison and had made the following observations : “54. I have considered the evidence as a whole and submissions of both the sides including above citations. I have reached to the conclusion that P.W. No.1, 3, 4, 5, 6 being near relatives of the deceased have set up the case of poison against the accused which could not be proved as the poison bottle was not seized by the I.O. and the C.A. report Exh. 27 does not show detection of poison in the viscera including cells of the deceased. Admittedly the poison does not vanish from cellular level from the body and if the death would have caused due to poison then it would have certainly found by C.A. The I.O. has failed to record statements of doctors from Dr. Tambe Hospital and the hospital record which have created strong doubt in the prosecution evidence. Thus the evidence of P.Ws. including medical officers, I.O. is totally contradictory with the Exh. 27 report of C.A. The evidence of some of the witnesses is suffering from material omissions as referred above and P.Ws. being relatives of the deceased appeared to be interested and got of witnesses as their statements and evidence is of stereo-type nature. The P.Ws. could not depose day, datewise incidents regarding demand, cruelty etc. Hence I could not believe the evidence of all the witnesses. 55. The prosecution has failed to prove that if Rs. 20,000/- was given to the accused then whether accused had purchased cows or not because it was quite relevant to prove further allegations of the demand of tin-sheets for cow sheds. However the prosecution has failed to prove the allegations regarding this. The inquest panchanama and P.M. report have not shown any external injury, mark of violence etc. on her body to prove the allegations of beating. 56. There are two sets of evidence regarding the cause of death i.e. one by poison which is shrouded in mystery and the other by sub-arachnoid haemorrhage 6 Cri.Appln.No.1053/2011 as per defence story and this second cause is strongly supported by P.M. report.” 7. On basis of these observations, the learned trial Court proceeded to acquit the respondents/ accused. Significantly, P.W. 8 Dr. Bhaskar Bhavar had reserved the final cause of death till the outcome of the scientific investigation at the hands of the Forensic Science Laboratory. In interregnum, he opined that death of Sunita was caused due to asphyxia on consumption of unknown poison. However, C.A. report (Exh. 27) revealed no poison in the viscera namely pieces of stomach, intestine, liver, lungs, kidney and various organs collected from the body of deceased Sunita in course of the post mortem examination conducted by P.W.8 Dr. Bhavar. In his evidence, P.W.8 Bhavar admitted that there is no term like “unknown poison” and the bile-juice also has a green colour. According to him, asphyxia was possible in case of hanging, strangulation, drowning, vomiting and the asphyxia of the deceased was not due to either strangulation or drowning. He further admitted that one cannot reach conclusion of poisoning due to mere changes caused due to asphyxia. He further deposed that there was sub-arachnoid haemorrhage in the brain and it can either occur with or without external injury to the head and such haemorrhage was possible due to natural causes as well as due to high blood pressure. Pertinently, there were no signs of physical 7 Cri.Appln.No.1053/2011 violence in form of external injuries on the body of the deceased. In light of this medical evidence, the observations by the learned trial Court in that regard cannot be faulted. 8. Learned A.P.P. for the State conceded that the observations regarding the prosecution witnesses on the point of cruelty cannot be said to be without any basis in the evidence. P.W.1 Sampat Bankar, P.W.3 Bharat Bankar, P.W.4 Bansi Bankar, P.W.5 Ramnath Shinde, P.W.6 Popat Pawbake are relations of the deceased and all of them stead fastly adhered to the theory of poisoning of the deceased Sunita unmindful of what the body of the deceased offered to negative the case of poisoning. Vague allegations made by them about the cruelty without any independent corroboration were rightly discarded by the learned trial Court for arriving at the conclusions. No interference is, therefore, warranted in the impugned judgment. Leave is, therefore, refused. The application stands rejected. ( U.D. SALVI, J. ) fmp/cri1053.11