Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order dated 7th December 1995 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad in Sessions Case No. 97/1993, acquitting the respondents (Madhukar Baliram Survase and Subabai W/o Pandhari Kamble) for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and also acquitting respondent no.2 for the offence under Section 452 IPC. The case of the prosecution was that Indubai, daughter of PW1 Murlidhar Dhargude, was married to accused no.1 Madhukar about seven years prior to her death. Accused no.1 and accused no.2 (Subabai) were having illicit relations, which Indubai knew, leading to quarrels. Accused no.1 asked Indubai to give divorce as he intended to marry again. Indubai died on 12.05.1993 due to burn injuries. The prosecution alleged that the accused poured kerosene on Indubai and set her on fire. The trial court acquitted the accused. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence. The court noted that the dying declaration (Exh. 28) recorded by the Executive Magistrate was not reliable as it was recorded after the doctor certified the patient was conscious, but the doctor was not examined. The court also found that the evidence of PW1 (father) and PW2 (mother) regarding cruelty and demand for divorce was not corroborated by independent witnesses. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the death was homicidal or that the accused subjected Indubai to cruelty. The court also noted that the trial court's findings were not perverse and were based on a possible view of the evidence. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeal - Standard of Review - In an appeal against acquittal, the High Court will not interfere unless the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence, or the view taken is not a possible view. (Para 1) B) Criminal Law - Dowry Death - Section 498A IPC - Cruelty - The prosecution must prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand for dowry. Mere illicit relationship of husband and demand for divorce does not constitute cruelty under Section 498A IPC. (Paras 2-5) C) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Homicidal Death - The prosecution must prove that the death was homicidal and caused by the accused. In case of burn injuries, the nature of death (accidental or homicidal) must be established. Dying declaration must be reliable and free from tutoring. (Paras 6-10) D) Criminal Law - House Trespass - Section 452 IPC - The prosecution must prove that the accused committed house trespass after preparation to cause hurt or assault. Mere presence of accused in the house is not sufficient. (Para 11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 498A, 302 read with 34 IPC and Section 452 IPC was proper and based on correct appreciation of evidence.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondents for all offences.
Law Points
- Acquittal upheld
- lack of evidence of cruelty
- no proof of homicidal death
- dying declaration not reliable
- no corroboration of demand of divorce as cruelty
- Section 498A IPC requires proof of cruelty
- Section 302 IPC requires proof of homicidal death
- Section 452 IPC requires proof of house trespass with intent to commit offence
