Court dismisses plea of Nanded farmer convicted of murder

Aurangabad: The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court recently rejected the criminal appeal filed by a 60-year-old farmer who has been convicted of murdering his daughter-in-law in June 2008.
The convict — Nagorao Kamble, a resident of Panbhosi in Loha taluka of Nanded district — had set his daughter-in-law on fire while the family was away.
The deceased, 22-year-old Nilavati, had married Kamble’s son Maneji in 2003.She was unable to bear a child due to which her in-laws were not treating her well. On the day of the incident, June 2, 2008, Kamble came home drunk and started abusing her while she was cooking. Upset over the ill treatment, Nilavati stopped cooking and that infuriated the convict.
In a fit of rage, Kamble started assaulting the deceased and pushed her in the corner of their house. Later before leaving the house, he poured kerosene on Nilavati and set her ablaze. She was rushed to a primary health clinic from where she was taken to a private hospital in Nanded. She died while undergoing treatment on June 18, 2008.
Following the trial, the Ad-hoc Additional sessions judge (Kandhar) on May 21, 2010, convicted Nagorao and sentenced him to life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 5,000.
Lawyer Rekha K Laddha, while defending the accused, argued before the high court that multiple dying declarations relied upon by the prosecution are unreliable. “Nilavati was not mentally and physically fit to make various declarations and statements as she had suffered 90% burn injuries. The accused had no intention to kill his daughter-in-law,” she argued.
While dismissing the plea, the bench comprising justices Ravindra V Ghuge and B U Debadwar observed: “In the case at hand, none of the dying declaration falsifies the other dying declaration, therefore, the aforesaid ratio in any case would not help the defense for claiming benefit of doubt.’’
It added: “We do not find that the learned Ad-hoc Additional sessions judge was in error in arriving at the finding that the appellant-accused is guilty of having committed the murder of his daughter-in-law Nilavati. There is no merit in this appeal and, therefore, the same is dismissed.’’