IV. APPASAHEB AND ANR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Flashcards
(6 cards)
IV. APPASAHEB AND ANR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (BACKGROUND OF THE VICTIM)
The Victim Bhimabai married Appasaheb about two and a half years ago and were living with Appasaheb’s mother in their house. At the time of the marriage. A sum of Rs. 5000 and some gold ornaments had been given at the time of the marriage of Bhimabai. For about six months, Bhimabai was treated well, but thereafter the accused started asking her to bring Rs. 1,000-1,200 from her parents to meet the household expenses and also for purchasing manure.
Whenever Bhimabai went to her parental home, she used to tell her parents that her husband and mother-in-law were harassing her and used to occasionally beat her. Her father, Tukaram, along with some of his relatives, went to the house of the accused and tried to persuade them not to ill-treat Bhimabai. Thereafter, the accused treated Bhimabai properly, but after about four months, they again started harassing her.
A few days prior Bhimabai came to her parental home and complained that the accused were not giving her proper food, clothings and even footwear. She also told her parents that her husband had asked her to bring an amount of Rs.1,000-1,200 for the purpose of household expenses and manure.
Now, on the date the someone came to Bhimabai’s father and stated that she was unwell. He then immediately went to the house of the accused along with some of his relatives. There, he saw that Bhimabai was lying dead, and froth was coming out of her mouth, which indicated that she had consumed some poisonous substance. The father filed the FIR.
IV. APPASAHEB AND ANR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (SCI)
- The court relied on the cross-examinations of the mother and father of the Victim and from that took the facts that:
a. The father had mentioned that she used to complain that she was being subjected to harassment by the appellants on account of some “domestic reasons”
b. The mother mentioned that Bhimabai was receiving ill-treatment as a result of “domestic cause” and to a specific question put by the Court as to what she meant by “domestic cause” she gave a reply that there was a demand for money for defraying expenses of manure etc. the court also relied heavily on the facts that the statement which was recorded on the very next day of the death of Bhimabai, the mother did not state that the cause for ill-treatment was “a demand for money and a consequent beating”. The court went on to add that the evidence on record does not indicate that the police had any reason to favour the accused and deliberately omitted to mention about the alleged demand of money and also added that “The evidence shows that the accused come from very humble background and they could not have exerted any kind of influence, financial or otherwise, upon the police so as to manage a statement favourable to them” - The court looked at the definition of “Dowry” as any property or valuable security should be given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly at or before or at any time after the marriage and in connection with the marriage of the said parties. The court here strictly constructed the meaning of the word Dowry and stated that a demand for money on account of some financial stringency or for meeting some urgent domestic expenses or for purchasing manure cannot be termed as a demand for dowry as the said word is normally understood. The demand made by the appellants was allegedly for some money for meeting domestic expenses and for purchasing manure
- The court also stated that there is absolutely no evidence, either direct or circumstantial, to show that Bhimabai committed suicide. They added that the insecticide Thimet is extensively used by the farmers for the preservation of crop, and is kept stored in their houses, and it could be a case where Thimet accidentally got mixed with some food item and was consumed by Bhaimabai.
- The court also did not look into Section 498A for the appeal in the high court because the powers conferred by this clause cannot be exercised for the purpose of reversing an order of acquittal passed in favour of a party in respect of an offence charged, in dealing with an appeal preferred by him against the order of conviction in respect of another offence charged and found proved.
V. BOMMA ILAIAH V. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (BACKGROUND OF THE CASE)
Bomma Kanakamma married the accused in February 1992. At the time of marriage, her parents gave the accused a bicycle, wristwatch, and household articles. Two months after their marriage, the accused started harassing her to get rid of her and to marry another girl, As a result, her parents even took her away from the house for 2 days, but on the advice of the elders, she was brought back. The accused and his family used to abuse her on the grounds that she was not doing household work properly. He did not say that the accused demanded any dowry. When they brought her back the accused forced her to have sexual intercourse with him, relieved her clothes, inserted his fingers and a stick in her vagina, and caused severe pains and bleeding and she became unconscious. But for the next four days, she was not given any medical attention, and when her parents forced her in, she was taken to a hospital. Charges of 498A were filed, but were subsequently changed to Grievous Hurt.
V. BOMMA ILAIAH V. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (WITH REGARDS TO “CRUELTY”)
In order to constitute cruelty under clause (a), it is not enough that the conduct of the accused is willful and is offensively unjust to a woman, but it is further necessary that the degree of intensity of such unjust conduct on the part of the accused is such as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or such conduct is likely to cause grave injury or danger to her life or limb, or to her mental or physical health. The evidence on record does not disclose that there was cruelty on the part of the accused which was of such a nature as was likely to drive the victim to commit suicide or cause grave injury or danger to her life or limb, or mental or physical health.
V. BOMMA ILAIAH V. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (INJURIES SUSTAINED BY THE VICTIM)
There was heavy internal bleeding which indicated that it might have been caused by a sharp weapon like a stick being pushed through the vagina down to the rectum causing the injuries. The victim spent a total of 4 months in the hospital to completely recover from the injuries.
V. BOMMA ILAIAH V. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (WITH REGARDS TO “GRIEVOUS HURT”)
These injuries, corroborated by the evidence presented by the Medical officer, indicate serious injuries to the Victim and, as a result, the accused was convicted of the charges of voluntarily causing grievous hurt.
