( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4387 OF 2007 The State of Maharashtra APPLICANT VERSUS Hanumant Sudhakar Chorghade and others. RESPONDENTS ..... Mrs. R.D. Reddy, APP for the applicant. Mr. P.S. Shinde, advocate holding for Smt. S.S. Jadhav, advocate for the respondents. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 21st August, 2009] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The respondents were tried before the learned Sessions Judge, Osmanabad in Sessions Case No. 85/2006 for offences punishable under section 498A read with section 34 and 306 of the I.P. Code. They have been acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge for want of satisfactory evidence. ( 2 ) 3. The impugned judgement reveals that the versions of the prosecution witnesses, namely, PW1 Babasaheb and PW2 Vishal purported to show that there was demand made by the respondents for Rs. 50,000/- as they intended to dig and construct a well in their field. However, it was noticed that there was already a well situated in the field of the respondents and, therefore, the cause for such demand was rather unconvincing. The prosecution relied upon testimony of the father and brother i.e. PW Babasaheb and PW Vishal in order to prove that the deceased – Smt. Shalan was subjected to matrimonial cruelty at the hands of the respondents. It was noticed that their versions and version of PW3 Smt. Shagunabai, who is the mother of the deceased, are not in consonance with each other. It appears that deceased Smt. Shalan was married to the respondent No. 1 on 21-04-2006. She died within period of about two (2) month of the marriage. The allegations about the suicide is based on mere surmises. It is explicit that deceased Shalan had fallen in the well situated in the field of the respondents. The possibility that she had gone to the well for drawing ( 3 ) water is explicit from the attending circumstances. the prosecution examined PW4 Hamida Shaikh who deals in business of vending bangles in the village. She stated that deceased Shalan had narrated to her about the ill- treatment meted out to her in the matrimonial home. There was no substantial reason for the deceased to repose confidence in PW Hamida. It is probable that sometimes, such loose talk is heard and thereafter, attempt is made to make out and out of the manhole. Basically, when there is no cogent evidence to infer that the death was suicidal, then the charges cannot stick to the respondents. The reasoning of the learned Sessions Judge appears to be proper. Consequently, I hold that no proper case is made out to grant leave to appeal. Hence, the leave to appeal is refused. The application is dismissed. Accordingly, the criminal appeal stands dismissed. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/CRIAPLN4387-07 ( 4 )