Yuvraj Chango Kale vs The State Of Maharashtra on 12 September, 2017

1 APEAL532.2001



Yuvraj S/o Chango Kale,
Age : 28 years, Occu. Agriculture,
R/o. Moykheda Digar, Tq. Jamner,
Dist. Jalgaon. … the Appellants


The State of Maharashtra. … the Respondent
Mr R. S. Shinde, Advocate for the appellant
Mr M. M. Nerlikar, APP for respondent/State



1. Vide the Judgment and Order dt. 09.11.2001 passed by the

learned IInd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgoan in Sessions

Case No. 10/1996, the appellant was convicted and sentenced for the

offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal

Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”). For offence punishable u/s

306 of the IPC, he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for

four years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine,

to suffer simple imprisonment for one month and for offence u/s

498A of the IPC, he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment

for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of

fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::

2 APEAL532.2001

2. Deceased Yunubai was sister of the informant PW1-

Bhagwan. She had married to the appellant Yuvraj about five years

before the incident. As per FIR, dowry of Rs. 4,000/- was paid at the

time of marriage. Yunubai lived with her husband at Moykheda

Digar, Tq. Jamner, for two and half months. Thereafter, the

appellant complained about insufficient dowry and about his dislike

of Yunubai and made further demand of Rs. 5,000/-. As the maternal

relatives of the Yunubai were unable to meet the demand, Yunubai

was constrained to reside at her maternal house for a period of three

years. After Diwali in 1994, the maternal relatives of Yunubai took

help of some Mediators and reached Yunubai to her matrimonial

house. The informant Bhagwan and his mother had visited the

matrimonial house of Yunubai on 2-3 occasions and that time

Yunubai was complaining about ill-treatment to her and dowry

demand of Rs. 5000/- by her husband, parents in-laws and sisters-in-

law. In FIR, it is alleged that, on 26.05.1995 at 3:00 PM, Yunubai

came to her maternal house at Jamner and informed her brother that

her in-laws and husband had demanded dowry of Rs. 5,000/- from

her. PW1 Bhagwan persuaded her to resume cohabitation. It is

alleged that, her sisters-in-law i.e. Latabai Anita were visiting her

house and were scolding her on account of insufficient dowry and

were making dowry demands. On 06.10.1995 at about 4:30 pm

when PW1 was in the school, he received message that Yunubai has

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
3 APEAL532.2001

died. When he went to her matrimonial house, he found that

Yunubai died due to consumption of poisonous insecticide. Froth was

oozing from her nostrils and mouth. PW1 accordingly lodged FIR on

the next date i.e. 07.10.1995 at Jamner Police Station and the crime

was registered at C.R. No. 280/95 u/s 306, 498A r/w 34 of the IPC.

The same was investigated into. The statements of material witensses

were recorded. Inquest spot panchanama was drawn. PM was

conducted on the dead body. After conclusion of trial, the charge-

sheet was submitted in the court. In due course, the case was

committed to the court of Sessions. Charge was framed at Exh. 53

against the appellant Yuvraj, his parents and his sisters for offences

u/s 306, 498A r/w 34 of IPC. The prosecution examined 7 witnesses.

The accused denied all the allegations and came with the case of

accidental death by inhaling the insecticide.

3. After considering the evidence on record, the learned IInd

Ad-hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalgaon convicted accused No. 1 –

Yuvraj for the offences punishable u/s 306 and 498A r/w 34 of IPC

and awarded sentences as referred to above. Rest of the accused

were acquitted. Hence this appeal against conviction.

4. Shri. R. S. Shinde, learned counsel for the appellant argued

that, there is no evidence to show that the appellant had subjected

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
4 APEAL532.2001

the deceased to cruelty or to dowry demands. The evidence of PW1,

3 5 in this regard is not reliable. There are vague allegations.

There is no material to show that the act of the appellant amounted

to abetment as defined u/s 107 of the IPC. It is also argued that, it

was not a case of suicide but it was accidental death by inhaling the

insecticide. He argued that the allegations are extremely vague and

those cannot be relied upon.

5. Per contra, Mr Nerlikar, learned APP strongly supported the

Judgment of the trial Court. He argued that there was persistent

dowry demand and ill-treatment which built pressure on the

deceased and she was left with no alternative but to commit suicide.

He pointed out that, deceased was deserted within 2.5 months after

the marriage on account of non payment of dowry and she had to

reside at her maternal house for three years. Thereafter, due to

persuasion of mediators she had resumed cohabitation but even

thereafter ill-treatment continued to her. Her mother had visited her

house and that time she had narrated the story about ill-treatment

being meted out to her at the instance of the appellant and her in-

laws. Besides, on 26.09.1995 i.e. 10 days before the incident, the

deceased had been to her brother’s house at Jamner and again

narrated the story about dowry demands and ill-treatment. The

accused have taken a false defence of accidental death which is ruled

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
5 APEAL532.2001

out by the evidence of Medical Officer. The deceased has committed

suicide within a period of 7 years from the date of marriage. The

appellant has not given satisfactory explanation for her committing

suicide. Hence, the evidence of PW1 PW5 should be believed and

the appeal should be dismissed.

6. The points for my consideration with my findings thereon

are as follows:

Sr. Points Findings
(I) Whether the deceased committed suicide? In the Affirmative

(II) Whether the appellant abetted the In the Negative
deceased to commit suicide by
persistently subjecting her to cruelty and

(III) Whether the appellant subjected the In the Negative
deceased to ill-treatment and cruelty as
defined u/s 498A of

(IV) What order? As per final order.


7. As to points No. 1: – There is evidence of brother and

mother of deceased that the deceased met with death due to

poisonous insecticide. Froth was oozing from her nostrils and mouth.

Her dead body was sent for post-mortem and PW2-Dr. Yusuf has

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
6 APEAL532.2001

conducted the Post-mortem. He has found symptoms of poisoning by

insecticide. He found 50 ML of semi ductile fluid with mucus

mernrance conjested. The viscera was preserved and the stomach

contained organophosperous poison. CA report to that effect is at

Exh. 65. It was argued that, such poisoning is possible by

accidentally inhaling the poisonous substance. The Medical Officer

has not accepted this position. Besides, in accidental inhaling, there

could not have been any semi fluid found in the viscera as was found

in the stomach contents of the deceased – Yunubai. It is also to be

noted that, Yunubai was from a farmer’s family and after marriage

also, she was cohabiting with a farmer and it can be assumed that the

farmers and their relatives are aware about the dangerous effects of

the insecticide kept inside the house. Therefore, there is no possibility

of deceased accidentally inhaling the insecticide. I, therefore, find

that it was a case of committing suicide by deceased – Yunubai.

Admittedly, it is committed within 7 years of marriage. Point No. 1 is

thus answered in the affirmative.

8. As to points No. 2 3 : As per Section 113(A), the

presumption as to abetment of committing suicide by married woman

can be drawn when the bride has committed suicide within seven

years of the marriage and there is evidence to show that her husband

or relatives of her husband had subjected her to cruelty. Section

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
7 APEAL532.2001

113(A) discloses that it is a discretionary presumption and the court

has to take into consideration all the circumstances of the case for

drawing such presumption.

9. It is well settled that, mere death of a bride within seven

years of marriage or even within a very short period after the

marriage, is by itself not indicative of any dowry demands or ill-

treatment to her at the instance of the husband or in-laws. In State

of West Bengal v Orilal Jaiswal another 1994 CRI. L. J. 2104

(SC), it is held that, the prosecution has to rule out the possibility of

sensitive bride committing suicide on account of ordinary petulance

or discord in the married life of husband and wife occurring in day to

day activities.

10. Since there is no direct evidence, the prosecution has relied

on the fact that Yunubai was telling to her maternal relatives about

the dowry demands and ill-treatment to her by her husband and in-


11. The prosecution has examined seven witnesses, out of

which PW1 Bhagwan is the brother and the informant while PW5

Narmadabai is the mother of the deceased. From the nature of FIR

and the evidence on record, one can guess about the financial

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
8 APEAL532.2001

condition of both the families. It is alleged that, dowry of Rs. 4,000/-

was demanded at the time of marriage but subsequently it has come

on record that this dowry was paid by consent and it included the

marriage expenses which were borne by the accused.

12. PW1 Bhagwan and PW5’s evidence show that after the

marriage Yunubai cohabited with her husband merely for 2 and ½

months. During this period, she was subjected to further demand of

Rs. 5,000/- and she was also subjected to taunting that she was not

liked by her husband and in-laws. After 2.5 months, she was brought

to her maternal house and the appellant declined to cohabit with her

unless the dowry was paid. Therefore, she resided at her maternal

house for three years. There is evidence of PW1 PW5 that, after

Diwali in 1994, with the help of Mediator Bhaskar Palve, Daulatrao

and Govind Kapse, the appellant and his relatives were persuaded

and deceased Yunubai resumed cohabitation. Thereafter she

cohabited with the appellant till her death on 06.10.1995 (for a

period of one year).

13. PW1 has stated that, during this cohabitation period, he

and his mother had visited the matrimonial house of deceased to

make inquiry of her well-being. At that time Yunubai told them

about the persistent dowry demands and about dislike by her

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
9 APEAL532.2001

husband and in-laws. This fact was expressed by her to her brother

and mother. She also used to tell them that she was beaten. PW1

stated that, on 26.09.1995 about 10 days before suicide, at around

3.00 PM, deceased Yunubai had been to his house and told him that

her husband and in-laws were demanding dowry of Rs. 5,000/- and if

the amount would not be paid, she would not be allowed to stay.

PW1 stated that, she also told that her two sisters in-law had visited

her matrimonial house and had taken away sarees given to her by her

brother and they were also complaining about insufficient dowry

received by their brother.

14. In cross-examination, it is brought on record that, during

the period of three years, when his sister was residing with him, no

notice was issued by the accused nor any complaint was made to the

police. His evidence that, with the help of Mediator i.e. Ramkrushna,

he had persuaded the accused in order to resume cohabitation with

his sister, is by way of omission.

15. PW5 Narmada has also deposed about her daughter

Yunubai returning to her house about 2.5 months after marriage and

about dowry demands of Rs. 5,000/- as a condition precedent to

resume cohabitation put by the appellant. She stated that, since the

amount was not paid, her daughter remained with her for three

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
10 APEAL532.2001

years. Thereafter, efforts were made to resume cohabitation and

Yunubai started cohabiting with the appellant. She stated that, once

about 2.5 months after the marriage, she had gone to the house of

the accused, that time Yunubai had told her that she was being ill-

treated, beaten and starved. There was demand of Rs. 5,000/- and

there was threat that she would be divorced. Her remaining evidence

is regarding the incidents after she received the news of death of


16. PW3 is a panch witness and neighbour of PW5. Apart from

deposing facts about spot panchanama, he has also deposed that

deceased Yunubai was his maternal sister and he had met her at her

maternal house after her marriage and that time she was complaining

about ill-treatment to her at the hands of the accused. He had also

learnt about dowry demand of Rs. 5,000/- made from her which was

disclosed by him to Yunubai’s brother.

17. On careful consideration of the evidence, I find that the

allegations regarding ill-treatment are vague. The words like

abusing, beating are used without date, time and place. Even at

many places the names of persons who had beaten her are not

disclosed. The material fact is that, as per evidence of PW1, on

26.09.1995, Yunubai had been to the house of her brother and made

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
11 APEAL532.2001

complaint of ill-treatment, dowry demand etc. but her mother is

totally silent about the same. It was argued that, her mother was

residing at different place. Still in the light of the facts stated earlier,

PW1 ought to have given information to his mother and ought to

have discussed the further plan. The allegations further disclose that

she was taunted on account of her looks. There is also evidence that,

there was demand of dowry of Rs.5,000/-. PW5 stated that she had

gone to the house of Yunubai and that time Yunubai complained to

her about dowry demand ill-treatment.

18. The previous and subsequent conduct of the parties is very

much relevant to determine the credibility of the evidence. It is true

that, for three years, deceased stayed at her maternal house and

thereafter resumed cohabitation. Considering the fact that the dowry

of only Rs. 4,000/- was demanded at the time of marriage and that

too inclusive of the expenses of the marriage, it is difficult to accept

that the appellants were subjecting deceased to ill-treatment on

account of not meeting the dowry demands. I find that, the evidence

regarding ill-treatment is extremely vague. Such vague evidence does

not inspire confidence. The conduct of PW1, PW5 and deceased-

Yunubai is not in conformity with the allegations of dowry demand

ill-treatment. Unfortunately Yunubai has committed suicide within 7

years from the date of her marriage but the reason for her suicide

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
12 APEAL532.2001

remains shrouded in the mystery. In this situation, it cannot be said

that as the accused has failed to explain the reason of suicide, the

reason put forth by the maternal relatives of deceased can be


19. If there was persistent dowry demand, there would have

been some efforts at least to pay some amount or there could have

been some attempt to persuade the appellant and his relatives by

expressing inability of PW1 PW5 to pay dowry, but the subsequent

conduct does not disclose any such situation. As far as stay of the

deceased at her maternal house for 3 years is concerned, surprisingly

PW1 PW5 did not take any steps for 3 years to resolve the dispute

and persuade the appellant to resume cohabitation. Even after the

incident dt. 26.09.2015, PW1 did nothing to safeguard the life of his

sister. I, therefore, find that the evidence regarding dowry and ill-

treatment does not inspire confidence. There was similar evidence

against the appellant as well his parents and sisters. The ld. trial

Judge for the reasons best known to her discarded the same evidence

as against the parents and sisters while accepted the same against the


20. There is no material to show that the accused created a

situation for the deceased Yunubai whereby she was left with no

::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::
13 APEAL532.2001

option but to commit suicide. Therefore, the conviction of the

appellant is not sustainable. Hence, the points formulated by me are

answered in the negative. Hence, the following order.


1. The appeal presented by appellant – Yuvraj S/o

Chango Kale is allowed.

2. The Judgment and Order dt. 09.11.2011 passed by the

learned IInd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgoan

in Sessions Case No. 10/1996 convicting and

sentencing the appellant for the offences punishable

under Sections 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code

is set aside.

3. The bail bonds of the appellant stand forfeited. The

appellant-accused shall furnish fresh bail bonds of Rs.

10,000/- with one surety in the like amount u/s 437A

of the Code of Criminal Procedure.



::: Uploaded on – 20/09/2017 22/09/2017 00:32:47 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *