The State Of Maharashtra v. Ramesh Vilas Kale And Other

(1) Cr. Appln. 4636/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4636 OF 2014 The State of Maharashtra Through Baliram Dhondiba Mali, Age 45 years, Occu.: Agri., R/o Gavde - Darphal, Tq. North Solapur, Dist. Solapur .. Applicant [Orig. Complainant] Vs.

1] Ramesh S/o Vilas Kale Age 30 years 2] Vilas Tukaram Kale, Age 48 years 3] Kesharbai Vilas Kale, Age 46 years, All R/o Kati, Tq. Tuljapur, Dist. Osmanabad .. Respondents [Ori. Accused] ---- Mr. N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for the applicant/State Mr. G.J. Kore, Advocate for the respondents ---- CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J.

DATE : 10/02/2016 ORAL ORDER :

Heard both sides.

2.

Aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondents from the offences punishable under section 306, 498-A r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned

(2) Cr. Appln. 4636/2014 Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanbad vide judgment and order dated 22/04/2014 passed in Sessions Case No.78 of 2012, the State wants to prefer an appeal and, therefore, the present application for leave to file appeal is preferred.

3.

Father of the deceased Vaishali i.e. Mr. Baliram Dhondiba Mali filed the complaint on 18/02/2012 against the present respondents. He alleged that during the 1-1/2 years of cohabitation of the deceased with respondent no.1 and his family members i.e. respondent nos. 2 and 3, the ill-treatment was given to her after six months of the marriage over a demand of Rs.50,000/- for digging a well. Deceased used to tell him about the said ill-treatment. About 7 months prior to the death of the deceased - Vaishali alongwith her son, the complainant fulfilled the demand.

.

Thereafter, however, the respondent no.1 made a demand of Rs.1,00,000/- for purchase of a tractor. About 15 days preceding her death, deceased Vaishali told about the said ill-treatment over the said unlawful

(3) Cr. Appln. 4636/2014 demand. The complainant showed his inability to pay the amount.

.

In the circumstances, on 14/02/2012, deceased Vaishali and her infant son went missing. Ultimately, upon searching, their dead bodies were found in a well on 16/02/2012. Therefore, the complaint came to be filed on 18/02/2012.

4.

Before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the complainant made contradictory statements. He deposed that after the birth of the child, the illtreatment was started while the prosecution case is that immediately after 5 months of the marriage, the illtreatment was started for demand of money. .

Most prominently, the complainant admitted that for 2 days after the death of the decease - Vaishali and her son, there were negotiations between him and the respondents, in which he made a demand of Rs.2,00,000/- from the respondents. However, the respondents refused to pay the amount and, thereafter, he lodged the F.I.R., on the basis of which the investigation was started.

(4) Cr. Appln. 4636/2014 5.

Taking into consideration all these facts, in my view, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has extended benefit of reasonable doubt while acquitting the respondents, on the basis of the material before him.

6.

The reasoning cannot be called as perverse one. In the circumstances, this is not a fit case to grant leave to file appeal. Leave is hereby refused. 7.

Application stands dismissed.

[M.T. JOSHI] JUDGE arp/