SHRIRAM PANDEY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgement dated 24.04.1995, passed in Sessions Trial No. 164 of 1990 by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Durg. By the impugned judgement, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:-

(2.) THE facts, briefly stated, are as under: The Deceased was married to appellant Alok Pandey (A-3) on 09.03.1988. Appellant Shriram Pandey (A-1) is father-in-law of the Deceased and appellant Smt. Kamla Pandey (A-2) is mother-in-law of the Deceased. Appellant Nagnarayan Sinha (A-4) was a next door neighbour of appellants-1 and 2 (A-1 and A-2). The Deceased was residing with her husband and in-laws in her in-laws house. She died on account of hanging in her in-laws house at about 10:00- 10:30 am on 03.04.1988. She was taken to the hospital and was examined by Dr.VVB Rao (PW-11). After the examination when he found that she was dead, a merg intimation (Ex.P/3) was sent to the police station at about 11:30 am. Inquest on the dead-body of the Deceased (Ex.P/4) was prepared and dead-body was sent for post-mortem to the Government Hospital, Durg, vide requisition Ex.P/5. The post-mortem examination was conducted by Dr.MC Mehnoth (PW-10). He found a broad ligature mark of about 1/2-inch over the front, left and right portion of her neck. Abrasions were also present along with the ligature mark. The ligature mark was ante-mortem. On internal examination, he found that the trachea, lungs, liver, spleen and kidneys were congested. The autopsy surgeon opined that the cause of death was asphyxia due to hanging, however, mode of death being suicidal or homicidal was not mentioned in the post-mortem report. The post-mortem report is Ex.P/6. On 03.03.1988, brother of the Deceased, namely, Siddhnath Dubey (PW-1) lodged First Information Report (FIR- Ex.P/1) on which offences under Sections 498-A, 306 and 304-B all read with Section 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 were registered. During the course of investigation, case-diary statements of Siddhnath Dubey (PW-1)-brother of the Deceased, Dashrath Dubey (PW-3)-father of the Deceased and Chandravathi @ Meera (PW-5)-sister of the Deceased were recorded on

(3.) SHRI Goutam Bhaduri, the counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Nagnarayan Sinha (A-4) has argued that this appellant was neighbour of the co-accused persons, therefore, he was not the relative of the husband and his conviction under Section 304-B read with Section 109 IPC cannot be sustained. He argued that even if the entire evidence available on record is taken at its face value, it would appear that there is evidence that he had simply demanded for dowry and at the most instigated for such demand and nothing else, therefore, his conviction under Section 304-B read with Section 109 IPC cannot be sustained.