1 UNREPORTED IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMIANL APPEAL NO.657 OF 2002. The State of Maharashtra ... Appellant. Versus 1. Ajay alias Dnyaneshwar Tulshiram Vajire, Age 27 years, 2. Tulshiram Ananda Vajire, ] Appeal abated as Age 67 years, ] against R.No.2 ] as per order dt. 18.8.2009. 3. Chindhabai Tulshiram Vajire, Age 62 years, All resident of Sunasgaon Khurd, Tal. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon. ... Respondents. ... Mr.N.R.Shaikh, A.P.P.for the Appellant. Mr.S.P.Katneshwarkar, advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 and 3. Appeal abated as against Respondent No.2 ... CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J. Date : 14.09.2009. 2 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Challenge in this appeal is to acquittal rendered in Sessions Case No.212/2000, whereby the Respondents were acquitted for offences punishable U/ss 498-A read with 34 and 306 of the I.P.Code, by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalgaon. 2. Somewhere in May 1998, Sangita was married to accused No.l Ajay. Original accused No.2 Tulshiram and accused No.3 Chindhabai are the parents of accused No.1 Ajay. They were residing together in a common house. Original accused No.2 Tulshiram died during pendency of the appeal and, therefore, the appeal has abated against him. After the marriage, Sangita started residing with the Respondents. She was blissed with a male child. Her brother - P.W. Dnyaneshwar is Gramsevak of village Pimpalgaon Hareshwar. On 13.9.2000, Sangita went to the agricultural land, purportedly, for attending the agricultural work, in the morning around 8 a.m. She consumed an insecticide called "Endosulphan". She died as a result of poisoning within a short 3 span of time. Her relatives were informed about the untimely death. They gathered and visited the house of the Respondents. In the meanwhile, a case of accidental death (A.D.) was registered at the Police Station. The Police had conducted inquest panchanama and had drawn the spot panchanama. A canister containing Endosulphan insecticide was recovered from the spot. Her brother gave report alleging that deceased Sangita was subjected to harassment and matrimonial cruelty by the Respondents on account of her failure to fulfill their unlawful demand for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) which they wanted for repairing of the residential house. The deceased - Sangita was frequently beaten up and ill-treated by them when the amount could not be paid by her father. On the basis of such report, the Police carried out certain investigation. Considering the material gathered during course of the investigation, the Respondents were put up on trial to face the charge for offences punishable U/ss 498-A read with 34 and 306 of the I.P.Code. 4 3. At the trial, the prosecution examined in all eight (8) witnesses in support of its case. The learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the FIR was lodged by P.W. Dnyaneshwar at belated stage after deliberations with the relatives and only on the basis of suspicion entertained by them. The learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that there was no reliable material to infer that Sangita was subjected to matrimonial cruelty during the short span of two years of the married life. The learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the versions of close relatives of deceased Sangita were not free from doubt and were unacceptable. The learned Sessions Judge, however, held that death of Sangita was of suicidal nature. In keeping with such findings, the Respondents were acquitted from the charges. 4. Heard learned A.P.P. and learned counsel. 5. Mr.Shaikh, learned A.P.P. would submit that death of Sangita admittedly was caused 5 within two (2) years of the marriage and was under unnatural circumstances. He would submit that P.W.1 Dnyaneshwar, P.W.4 Dilip and P.W.6 Namdeo are close relatives of deceased Sangita,yet, their versions should not have been brushed aside when they are the persons who could have first hand information about the alleged matrimonial cruelty. He points out from the postmortem notes that a bruise was found on person of deceased Sangita at the iliac crest point. The leaned A.P.P. would submit that presence of bruise is indicative of assault on deceased Sangita before she decided to end her life. He also submits that the Respondents gave incorrect and false information regarding cause of her death to her close relatives. Consequently, he urged to set aside the impugned judgment of acquittal. As against this, Mr.Katneshwarnar, learned advocate supports the impugned judgment. 6. Clinching question is whether the versions of P.W.1 Dnyaneshwar, P.W.4 Dilip and P.W.6 Namdeo, who are brother and brother-in-law 6 and father of deceased Sangita, can be implicitly relied upon to infer that she was subjected to matrimonial cruelty at the hands of the Respondents. So far as their versions are concerned, it is important to notice that the mother of the deceased did not enter the witness box. The testimony of P.W.6 Namdeo purports to show that Sangita used to narrate about the ill- treatment meted out to her at the hands of the Respondents. His version purports to show that about a month before her death, Sangita visited house of P.W.4 Dilip at village Kurangi. He was then residing in the said village. She narrated to him that the Respondents were demanding Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) for meeting out expenditure required for repairing of their house. She further narrated to him that when she told the Respondents that due to financial difficulties, her parents would not be able to pay, the inlaws abused and the husband assaulted her. She told him to give Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) somehow or the other. He convinced her about his inability. Thereafter, she was sent to house of the Respondents. He does not say that, 7 thereafter, she was ill-treated by the Respondents on account of non-fulfillment of such demand. He admits, unequivocally, that he suspected that the Respondents had provided poisonous insecticide to Sangita. He admits that on account of suspicion entertained by him and his relatives, the complaint was filed with the Police. He clearly admits that besides such suspicion, there was no reason to make the complaint with the Police against the Respondents. In other words, his admissions would make it amply clear that the averments about the alleged mal-treatment and matrimonial cruelty have been carved out due to the suspicion which was entertained by P.W.Namdeo and his relatives. 7. Admittedly, no action was taken in the past when she had made complaints about so-called ill-treatment. One can not be oblivious of the fact that P.W.Dnyaneshwar is a village Officer (Gramsevak), He is conversant with the legal procedure. Ordinarily, a person like P.W.Dnyaneshwar, would not have kept silence if 8 there were really serious complaints about the alleged matrimonial cruelty meted out to deceased Sangita. The version of P.W.Namdeo further goes to show that Sangita was quite sensitive. She use to take seriously even trivial matters. 8. It is in the above background and conduct of P.W.Namdeo that the testimony of P.W.Dnyaneshwar and Dilip may be scrutinised. Though P.W.Dnyaneshwar deposed that on 13.8.2000, he had gone to village Kurangi to attend Rakshabandan festival, yet, this claim is contrary to the version of P.W.Namdeo. According to P.W. Namdeo, P.W.Dnyaneshwar was not present when Sangita had visited village Kurangi on 13.8.2000 to attend the festival of Rakshabandan. What appears from version of P.W.Dnyaneshwar is that he use to reside at village Pimpalgaon Hareshwar, in connection with his official work and had hardly any personal knowledge regarding the so-called incident of demand ventilated by deceased Sangita on 13.8.2000 during her visit to the parent's house. Even so, he tried to show that he had such personal knowledge. Needless to 9 say, he had no compunction to give such untrue statement about his presence during visit of Sangita to village Kurangi. 9. The testimony of P.W.Dnyaneshwar, reveals that he lodged the FIR (Exh.20) after about 24 hours of the incident. The FIR was admittedly lodged after deliberations made by himself and the other relatives. His version reveals that his family members belong to poor financial strata, whereas the Respondents are well off. He admits : "The marriage expenses of Sangita were borne by the accused and hence, her marriage was performed at Sunasgaon which is their native." Considering the above candid admission of P.W.Dnyaneshwar, it does not stand to reason that the Respondent expected Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) from P.W.Namdeo through deceased Sangita. They incurred the marriage expenditure and were gracious enough to perform the ceremony 10 in their own village. He admitted that as and when he and his father use to visit the house of the Respondents, the latters use to show hospitality towards them. He further admitted that till the incident of the death of Sangita, they use to visit the house of the Respondents (accused) and the latters also use to visit their house. This conduct of the witnesses and the Respondents would indicate that there was mutual cordial relationship between them. He further admitted that he and his relatives had not objected the funeral of Sangita. The elaborate FIR (Exh.20) purports to show that P.W.Dnyaneshwar use to meet Sangita only during his visits to house of his parents. The testimony of P.W.4 Dilip does not advance case of the prosecution any further. He admits, likewise P.W. Namdeo, that after death of Sangita he suspected that the Respondents had done some misdeeds to her. He admits that due to such suspicion they decided to lodge the report with the Police. Considering these admissions of the witnesses, it is probable that after death of Sangita they entertained suspicion about the 11 matrimonial cruelty which could have caused her to end the life. They deliberated and lodged the FIR at belated stage. 10. True, the version of P.W.8 Dr.Rahul corroborates the postmortem notes (Exh.37) which go to show that there was a bruise on the iliac crest of the deceased of size 5 cm x 4 cm. However, the prosecution did not extract any opinion from P.W.Dr. Rahul as regards the said injury and cause thereof. The deceased could have fallen down after the consumption of insecticide or could have sustained such injury during the course of agricultural work or due to any other accidental reasons but mere presence of such injury on her person by itself can not give rise to the inference that she must have been subjected to physical assault by the Respondents. This might be far fetched conclusion and could be based on mere surmise. The learned A.P.P. invited my attention to certain observations in "Gurubachan Singh Vs. Satpal Singh and others" AIR 1990 Supreme Court 209. The Apex Court held that where two views are not possible and the 12 evidence pointed out to only one view, namely, cruel behaviour, constant taunts and harassment by accused husband and his relations to the deceased then the instigation to the suicide of deceased wife could be inferred. The fact situation in the present case is on quite different footing. Here is a case in which the prosecution did not examine any independent witness in support of the allegation pertaining to the matrimonial cruelty. The three witnesses mentioned above gave the versions which are either inconsistent or uncreditworthy. Having regard to the discussions stated hereinabove, I have no hesitation in holding that the charge is not brought home of the Respondents beyond a reasonable realm of doubt. The impugned judgment is sustainable inasmuch as a probable view has been taken by the Sessions Judge. Hence,the appeal is dismissed. (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) asp/office/Crappeal65702