1 rma IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 380 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 181 OF 2010 Nayana Chandrakant Kamble .. Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. S.V. Kotwal for the Applicant Mr. Rajesh More, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. RESERVED ON : 23rd April, 2010. PRONOUNCED ON : 30th April, 2010. P.C. : (PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J) 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and learned APP for the State. 2. By judgment and order dated 24.02.2010 passed by the Ad-Hoc Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 67 of 2009, the applicant - original accused came to be convicted under section 302 of I.P.C. for causing death of her husband Mr. Chandrakant on appa380-10 2 28.09.2008. 3. The applicant was residing in the servant's quarter of naval officer - Lt. Vishal Sharma PW7 who is serving in the navy. Lt. Vishal Sharma is the complainant in the present case and he was residing at Naval Officer's Flat, Sasoon Complex, Colaba Mumbai. Lt. Vishal Sharma had engaged the accused as maid servant since April 2007. The husband of the accused was addicted to liquor and he used to quarrel with the accused after consuming liquor. On 28.09.2008 at about 8.15 p.m., the accused came to the house of the complainant at about 10.00 p.m. to so some household work and returned to the servant's quarter. At that time, Lt. Vishal Sharma had heard quarrel between the accused and her husband. This continued for about 30-40 minutes. Thereafter, the complainant went to the house of the accused which is adjoining his house, after knocking on the door, he told the accused to maintain peace otherwise he would make complaint to Naval authorities for taking action against them. Thereafter also both of the accused and her husband continued with the quarrel. So the complainant again went to the servant's quarter and warned them to keep quiet. However, appa380-10 3 even thereafter at 11.00 p.m., the accused and her husband continued with the quarrel. The complainant also heard continuous shouts from the quarter of the accused and also sound of furniture being moved. Meanwhile the complainant informed the security officer at the main entrance and asked them to come to the flat on account of disturbance caused by the accused and her husband. After about 15 minutes i.e at about 11.30 p.m, Naval security person called the complainant on telephone and informed that the accused had come down alone to the gate and her hands and clothes were bloodstained. This fact was informed to the Naval police control room. After about 10 minutes, Naval security person came with the complainant Lt. Vishal Sharma to the quarter of the accused. When they went inside the quarter of the accused, they found husband of the accused was lying down and he was covered with a blanket upto the neck. They noticed injury on back of his head and they saw blood on the floor and wall of the quarter. They also noticed that the floor was wet and and it was freshly cleaned. The complainant made inquiry with the accused about blood stains and the accused told them that her husband might have got injured due to fall in drunken state and sustained injuries. appa380-10 4 4. The husband of the accused was taken to St. George Hospital. He was found to have 12 injuries on his person. PW9 Dr. Murkey examined Chandrakant. Dr. Murkey has stated that the deceased was under the influence of alcohol. However, within about two hours, deceased Chandrakant succumbed to injuries. The cause of death was on account of contused lacerated wounds on temporal and parieto region. 5. PW7 Lt. Vishal Sharma has deposed about the facts narrated in Para 3. His evidence is corroborated by evidence of PW3 Atulkumar Singh. Atul Kumar has stated that on 28.09.2008 at about 11.30 p.m., he received call from Lt. Vishal Sharma who told him that his maid and her husband were quarreling with each other and that he should warn them. He asked his colleague Baidyanath to go to the quarter of the accused. After sometime, Baidyanath returned and within few minutes, the accused also came to him. At that time, he noticed blood stains on the hands and visible parts of her legs. On inquiry , the accused told him that she was cutting fish and therefore, there were blood stains on her hand and legs. However, he did not get any fish smell. As PW3 Atulkumar found something suspicious, he contacted appa380-10 5 Lt. Vishal Sharma on telephone and told him about seeing blood stains on the hand and legs of the accused and he also requested Lt. Vishal Sharma to check. Thereafter, he went to the house of Lt. Vishal Sharma and both of them went to the room adjacent to the flat of Lt. Vishal Sharma where the accused resided with her husband. They knocked on the door which was opened by the accused. Thereafter, they entered the room of the accused and saw the body of the husband of the accused wrapped in bed sheet till the neck. They saw blood oozing from head and neck. 6. PW4 Dineshkumar Singh also corroborates the evidence of the complainant. This witness was working in Indian Navy - Naval police. He has stated that at about 11.30 p.m., his senior received a message about scuffle going on in the servant's quarter. Hence, he went to the servant's quarter accompanied by Lt. Vishal Shah and knocked on the door. The accused came out. On inquiry, she has stated that there was little fight with her husband and now the matter was over. On inquiry about her husband, she told that he was sleeping. On entering into her quarter, they found that her husband was covered with bed sheet upto the neck. However, they saw blood appa380-10 6 oozing for the head of the husband of the accused, hence, they made inquiry about the blood. The accused told them that her husband had taken drink and he might have sustained injury due to fall. They asked the accused to take her husband to the hospital, however, the accused was hesitant to take her husband who was then alive to the hospital. The evidence on record shows that for a long time, the accused did not take her husband to the hospital. In fact, the evidence of the complainant shows that even at about 12.30 p.m, Naval officer PW4 Dineshkumar came to his quarter and told him that the accused had not taken her husband to the hospital. 7. All the material on record shows that at the relevant time, the accused and her husband were in the quarter. Blood stains were found on the hands and feet of the accused. Blood stains were also found on the walls of the house. The floor of the house of the accused was wet,thereby showing that it had been recently cleaned. On making inquiry with the accused,she had given false explanation in respect of blood stains on her body and in respect of injuries found on the body of her husband. Even though her husband had sustained grievous injuries, she did not take any steps to immediately move him to the appa380-10 7 hospital even though she was asked to do so. All these facts clearly show the complicity of the accused in the murder of her husband. 8. The learned advocate for the applicant stated that the accused is a lady and she alone could not have caused injury to her husband without sustaining any injuries herself. However, it is seen that at the relevant time, deceased Chandrakant was under influence of liquor. This fact has been clearly stated by PW9 Dr. Murkey. As the deceased was in intoxicated condition, it would not be difficult for the accused to inflict blows on him. Moreover, the major injuries are seen on the head of the deceased. On sustaining one grievous injury on the head, deceased Chandrakant would not have been in a position to put up any resistance. Hence, we do not find any merit in this submission. 9. The learned advocate for the applicant further submitted that according to the prosecution, the weapon of assault was supposed to be a screw driver. However, according to Dr. Khan who conducted the postmortem, these injuries were not possible by screw driver. No doubt, Dr. Khan has stated that the injuries were not possible by screw driver. However, the evidence of the complainant shows that he has appa380-10 8 heard sound of some furniture being moved in the servant's quarter. As only the accused and the deceased were in the servant's quarter, it is not exactly known by the prosecution as to with what weapon, the accused assaulted the deceased. However, the circumstances encapsuled by us in para 6 above clearly shows her complicity in the crime. Looking to all these facts, we are not inclined to grant bail at this stage even though the applicant was on bail during the trial. Liberty is granted to the applicant to prefer a fresh application for bail at a later stage. 10. Needless to say that all observations made by us touching the merits of the case are prima facie observations. 11. Application is rejected. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] appa380-10 9 appa380-10