SANTRAM @ KONDA SARTHI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment dtd. 04/09/2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh in Sessions Trial No.90 of 2012, whereby the Appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:

(2.) Name of the deceased, in this case, is Bhoj Kumari. Appellant No.3, Kaushal is her husband and Appellant No.1, Santram and Appellant No.2, Nanki Dai are her father-in-law and mother-in-law. Her father, namely, Parmanand died one month before her birth and after few months of her birth her mother left her and went away. Her and her sister 's upbringing was done by their uncle Satyanand (PW3). In the month of May, 2011, she and her younger sister Santoshi (PW4) visited the house of their bua (father 's sister) Sadhmati (PW2). Appellant No.1, Santram is son-in-law of Sadhmati (PW2). Further case of the prosecution is that Appellant No.1, Santram took Bhoj Kumari (deceased) to his house at Village Junwani as a guest and there he performed her marriage against her will with Appellant No.3, Kaushal secretly. He did not inform about the marriage to the family members of Bhoj Kumari. After the marriage, when the Appellants did not send Bhoj Kumari back, first Sadhmati (PW2) and thereafter Satyanand (PW3) visited Junwani. There the Appellants created a dispute and did not send Bhoj Kumari back. Thereafter, on 24.6.2011 at about 7:30 p.m., the Appellants did a criminal conspiracy for committing murder of Bhoj Kumari and poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. On 25.6.2011 at about 3 midnight, Bhoj Kumari was admitted in K.G. Hospital, Raigarh in burnt condition. Information (Ex.P16) regarding her admission in the hospital was sent to the police station by Dr. R.K. Agrawal (PW15). Bhoj Kumari was medically examined by Dr. R.K. Agrawal (PW15) himself. His report is Ex.P17 in which he found that the whole body of Bhoj Kumari was burnt and smell of kerosene was coming out from her body. Since her condition was not that her statement could be recorded, her dying declaration could not be recorded. During the course of treatment, she died on 30.6.2011. An unnumbered morgue was registered on receiving information of her death at Police Station Kotwali, Raigarh. Thereafter, on the basis of the unnumbered morgue, numbered morgue (Ex.P2) was registered at Police Station Kharsia, District Raigarh. Inquest proceeding (Ex.P4) was conducted. Post mortem examination over the dead body of Bhoj Kumari was conducted by Dr. Jayant Shrivastava (PW6). Post mortem report given by him is Ex.P1. On the basis of morgue inquiry report and the inquiry conducted into the written complaint submitted by Satyanand (PW3), First Information Report (Ex.P6) was registered. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Sec. 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellants. The Trial Court framed charges against them under Sections 302 read with Sec. 120B IPC, alternatively under Sec. 304 IPC, alternatively under Sections 304A and 201 IPC.

(3.) In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses. In examination under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Appellants denied the guilt and pleaded innocence. No witness was examined in their defence.