1. This appeal has been preferred against the final judgment and order dated 09.04.2007 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 2005 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellants herein.
2. Brief facts:
(a) The present appeal pertains to the death of one Ashabai, resident of Chanda Taluk, Karjat District, Ahmednagar. She was married to one Nitin Tulshiram Suryawanshi-Accused No. 3 herein (special leave petition with respect to this accused has already been dismissed on 02.11.2007). Tulshiram Sahadu Suryawanshi (A-1) and Sindhubai Suryawanshi (A-2) are the parents of A-3. At the relevant time, A-3 was working as a driver.
(b) Sampat Madhavrao Suryawanshi (PW-2) is the relative of Kisan Bhanudas Sule (PW-1)-the father of the deceased and was the mediator of the said marriage. On 28.02.2003, the dead body of Ashabai was found to be floating in the well of one Sarjerao Suryawanshi with both the legs and hands tied by means of the border of a Saree. PW-2 lodged a complaint against the Appellants herein with regard to the above incident with the Karjat P.S., Ahmednagar, alleging the ill-treatment meted out to the deceased in order to fulfill the demand of Rs. 50,000/- for the purchase of a Jeep.
(c) On 28.02.2003, on the basis of the said complaint, Accidental Death No. 3 of 2003 and, after investigation, Crime No. 24 of 2003 was registered at the said police station.
(d) After filing of the charge sheet, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and numbered as Sessions Case No. 102 of 2004. On 03.08.2004, the 5th Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, framed charges against the Appellants under Sections 302, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'the Indian Penal Code'). Again, on 28.09.2004, an additional charge of Section 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was also framed against the Appellants.
(e) By order dated 10.01.2005, the 5th Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, convicted all the accused persons and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment under various heads mentioned above including life sentence and all the sentences were to run concurrently.
(f) Being aggrieved, the Appellants preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 2005 before the High Court of Bombay. By impugned order dated 09.04.2007, the Division Bench of the High Court while confirming the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Court, dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellants herein.
(g) Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court, the Appellants herein have filed this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
3. Heard Mr. Harinder Mohan Singh, learned amicus curiae for the Appellants-accused and Mr. Shankar Chillarge, Learned Counsel on behalf of the Respondent-State.
4. It is not in dispute that the conviction of the Appellants A-1 and A-2 is based on circumstantial evidence, hence, we have to see how........