JUDGEMENT
Fazal Ali, J. -
(1.)It is strange that supersititious beliefs should still persist in an age where science has made such progress and rationalism dominates over thinking. Yet we find a few stray cases where baseless and unfounded superstitions entertained by an educated person may lead to a family disaster. One such case forms the subject of this appeal filed in this Court after obtaining special leave.
(2.)The appellant Ashok Laxman Sohoni has been convicted under S.302. I.P.C. and sentenced to death, whereas another appellant Vijaya has been convicted under S.302/34, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The facts of the present case lie within a narrow compass. Laxman's family was residing in House No.622. Ravivar Peth in the town of Nasik. Prabhakar Sohoni who was the grandfather of appellant No.1 had five sons, namely, Ram, Pandua, Laxman, Bharat and Raghunath. We are not concerned with the branches of Pandua, Bharat and Raghunath. The appellant Ashok was one of the sons of Laxman by his wife Prabhavati. Usha and Vijaya appellant No.2 were the daughters of Laxman and sisters of Ashok. Shyam was another son of Laxman. In the branch of Ram, we have P.W.1 Suresh who is married to one Sabita. Suresh was, therefore, the first cousin of appellant No.1. According to the prosecution Suresh used to reside on the second floor of the house and Ashok on the first floor of the house which consisted of a few rooms, some of which were converted into a kitchen, bedroom and a Baithak. The ground floor was occupied by a tenant. Appellant No.1 Ashok Sohoni, for short to be referred to as "Ashok" was married to Shubhangi on June 22, 1973. Ashok appears to have joined the Army in 1962 and left the same in 1969 and took a job in the State Transport Department as a mechanic at Nandgaon 40 miles away from Nasik. The family of Ashok was a typical middle-class family which had just sufficient means to meet their two ends. Ashok and Vijaya lived in the first floor of the house along with their father. Ashok used to stay with his wife in a part of the kitchen which was converted into a bed room. Shyam was married to Shelpa on June 27, 1974 about six months before the occurrence. Appellant No.2 Vijaya was a primary school teacher but was unmarried. The other son Shyam was working as an electrician in Ozar a locality about 8 miles away from Nasik. It appears that soon after the marriage of Ashok and Shubhangi their relations became strained and the happiness of the couple was marred by a superstitious belief entertained by Ashok and other members of the family that Shubhangi was a witch and was practising sorcery with the aid of beads, wooden snakes and other articles. It is also alleged and in fact admitted by the accused that Vijaya appellant No. 2 appears to have been possessed of by a spirit of Meeravali Baba. Meeravali Hills situated at a short distance from the place of occurrence contained a Muslim Dargah where an old saint Syed Ishaque Ali Shah had been buried since 1565. It appears from the evidence that Ashok and other members of the family were the devotees of this saint and so deep was the devotion of Vijaya appellant No.2 that she got possessed with the spirit of Meeravali Baba himself. From a letter produced by the prosecution Ext. 55 dated June 10, 1974, the deceased Shubhangi whose maiden name was Pushpa had written to her brother for bringing certain presents on the forthcoming marriage of Shyam. This letter has been used by the prosecution in order to build a suggestion that the family of Ashok tried to make heavy demands for presents and money from the father of the deceased and that may have led to the death of the deceased at the hands of the appellants. We are, however, unable to find any clear or cogent evidence to prove this suggestion. Some stray observations in Ext. 55 cannot lead to the inescapable conclusion that there was any kind of unusual demand by the family of Ashok. We might also mention that few months before the occurrence Shubhangi had given birth to a dauther who was named Jahan Nabi. This daughter was born on May 5, 1974, at Nasik. The birth of a daughter to Shubangi at her father-in-law's place clearly indicates that till that time relations between the two families were quite cordial. It appears that on the night intervening 14th and 15th January, 1975, which was Maghar Sankranti day there was some altercation which unfortunately ended in the death of the deceased Shubhangi and the appellants tried their best to hush up the matter by arranging a quick and hasty cremation and by not informing their normal relations regarding the circumstances in which the death had occurred. A van was sent for along with the stretcher and the body of the deceased covered with chadar was placed on the stretcher and taken to the cremation ground. The prosecution further alleged that even the usual religious rites which were customary in the family were also not performed. It appears that somebody informed the police that the deceased Shubhangi had died an unnatural death and that the matter was tried to be hushed up by the appellants who were the real murderers. Thereupon the Sub-Inspector of Police visited the house of the appellants and interrogated the appellant and other members of his family. It may also be noted here that the father of the deceased had also arrived on getting a telegram and he was also told that Shubhangi had died without revealing the circumstances under which she died. On January 16, 1975, the appellant Ashok made a disclosure statement before the Sub-Inspector and one Ashok Ganpatrao Sambre when he narrated the incident and expressed his desire to point out the various incriminating articles. Consequently he climbed a loft over the kitchen with the aid of a ladder and after removing a number of clothes which were kept there he recovered and produced a crow bar, places of stick, the clothes of Shubhangi which were bloodstained, a blouse and other articles. A search memo, namely, panchanama, was made at 8.15 A.M. on January 16, 1975, which was duly signed by Ashok Ganpatrao Sambre and another person. The search witness Ashok Ganpatrao Sambre has appeared as P. W. 9 in the case and has proved the contents of the panchanama as also the fact that appellant No.1 after having made the statement took the party to the house and recovered the articles mentioned above. The witness appears to have been cross-examined only on the point whether he had seen the blood on the blade of the crow bar or in the middle of it. There is no dispute that the crow-bar was blood-stained. Whether the bloodstains were in the middle or on the blade may only be a matter of detail which the witness may or may not remember. But his testimony in the Court remains unchallenged. In these circumstances the recovery of the articles which has been proved by P.W.9 and supported by the panchanama Ext. 32 fully establishes the guilt of the appellant Ashok.
(3.)Apart from this circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has led the evidence of three eye-witnesses and three other witnesses to prove the fact that it was appellant No.1 and his sister Vijaya who had combined to cause the death of Shubhangi. Both the High Court and the Sessions Judge have believed P.Ws. 1 and 2 the eye-witnesses and P.Ws. 3, 4 and 5 the ear-witnesses and have accepted their evidence. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly conceded before us that in the present state of the evidence it was not possible to contend that the deceased had not died an unnatural death. The only argument put forward by counsel for the appellants was that even taking the evidence at its face value, at the most the case made out is one under S. 323, I.P.C. and not one under S.302, I.P.C.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.