Mumbai: Observing that it was quite natural that any man would feel ashamed to be called ‘impotent’ in public, the Bombay high court acquitted a man from the charge of murdering his estranged wife. The HC said that the man, while on his way to work was ‘gravely provoked’ by his wife, who called him impotent despite his being the father of three children.
A bench of Justices Sadhana Jadhav and Prithviraj Chavan also altered the conviction of Nandu Survase, a resident of Pandharpur, from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The bench even let him off for the jail term that he already spent - 12 years.
As per the prosecution case, Nandu had been married to Shakuntala for 15 years and the couple had two sons and a daughter. However, due to marital discord, the couple had parted ways and had been living separately for more than four years, prior to the incident which occurred in August 2009.
On August 28, 2009, when Nandu, a labourer, was on his way to work, Shakuntala, who was at the bus depot, obstructed his way. She allegedly caught hold of his collar and started abusing him.
The eyewitnesses to the case testified that Shakuntala not only abused him but repeatedly called him ‘impotent’. She had even claimed that because Nandu was impotent, she had been living separately and was having an illicit relationship, the eyewitness claimed.
The bench relied on the testimony of this eyewitness, who was also an independent witness in the case and the others to testify were the father, brother and sister of Shakuntala, who weren’t present at the scene of the crime.
Appearing for Nandu, advocate Shraddha Sawant argued that her client was gravely provoked by the abuses hurled against him and also by the “scathing remarks against his honour”. She accordingly, urged the bench to acquit her client from murder charge.
However, prosecutor Veera Shinde argued that Nandu should have shown self-restraint. She highlighted 10 injuries and chop wounds inflicted on Shakuntala which were grave.
The bench, having noted the contents of, said, “Nandu was the father of three grown children. On the fateful day, suddenly upon seeing the accused by chance, the deceased had not just obstructed his way by holding his neck and by pulling his shirt but had started hurling abuses and had levelled scathing remarks by which the self-esteem of the accused was not only lowered in his own eyes but in public.”
“The incident had occurred on a busy road. The loud allegations made by the deceased were heard by one and all,” the bench noted, further adding, “It was quite natural for the man to feel ashamed upon being referred as impotent.”
