The Confirmation Case No.1 of 2011 was filed by the State for companyfirmation of the death sentence awarded to the accused respondent.
The respondent herein preferred Criminal Appeal No.584 of 2011 before the High Court against the above noted companyviction order and the State of Maharashtra filed Confirmation Case No.1 of 2011 for companyfirmation of the death sentence awarded to the respondent by the Trial Court.
I 227 of 2010 was lodged at Police Station Newasa at the instance of one Nisar Ashraf Pathan after registration of report AD No.91 of 2010 under Section 174 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
Five other accused who were family members of the respondent were, however, acquitted from all the charges.
The High Court, however, rejected the death sentence and acquitted the accused respondent.
The brief facts leading to present criminal appeals may be summarized as follows Respondent Nisar Ramzan Sayyed got married with one Summayya deceased herein on 30.03.2007.
Thereafter the deceased was taken to the hospital by the respondent but her son died on the spot due to burn injuries.
Law was set into motion against the respondent and his family members when FIR No.
The deceased was seven months pregnant at the time of the incident.
The deceased succumbed to her injuries on 3rd November, 2010 after giving birth to a dead baby fetus.
As the financial companydition of the father of Summayya was poor, the said demand companyld number be met.
After the marriage they were jointly living with the respondents family and were blessed with a male child, namely Sayej who was three years old on the fateful day of incident.
Learned Additional Sessions Judge while taking companynizance on the basis of charge sheet No.12 of 2011 received on 27.01.2011 initiated Sessions Case No.18 of 2011 and vide his judgment and order dated 22nd September, 2011 companyvicted the respondent herein for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 498 A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to suffer death sentence and pay a fine of Rs.2000/ .
The High Court vide impugned judgment quashed and set aside the companyviction order passed against the respondent herein and companysequently, the death sentence companyfirmation case was dismissed.
The respondent and his family members treated Summayya well for a period of one year after the marriage.
The respondent companytinued the act of ill treatment with the deceased.
Thereafter, the respondent started ill treating her on the pretext of demand of Rs.50,000/ for purchasing an auto rickshaw.
On 29th October, 2010 at 500 a.m. the respondent herein allegedly set the deceased on fire by pouring kerosene oil and also threw the son Sayej on the burning body of the deceased.
Summayya and her son sustained burn injuries.
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. These appeals have been directed against the judgment and order dated 19th March, 2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, in Confirmation Case No.1 of 2011 with Criminal Appeal No.584 of 2011, whereby the companyviction order dated 22nd September, 2011 passed by learned District Judge 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur, against the respondent herein was quashed and set aside.
