HARIRAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 14.10.2000 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur in Sessions Trial No.378 of 1999 convicting and sentencing the Appellant as under:

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Appellant is husband of deceased Savitabai. Their marriage was solemnised in April, 1998. Acquitted accused persons Tijram, Nohar and Dayaram are brothers of the Appellant. Other acquitted accused Gayatribai is mother of the Appellant. Allegedly, after the marriage, the Appellant/husband and other acquitted accused persons demanded cash of Rs.10,000/- and a motorcycle as dowry from the deceased and her parents and on not being fulfilled the demand, they tortured and harassed the deceased. As a result of the torture and harassment, the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself at her matrimonial house on 22.6.1999 at about 8:00 a.m. Morgue intimation (Ex.P5) was given by Gaya Prasad, father-in-law of the deceased. Inquest (Ex.P2) was done by NaibTahsildar Y.S. Kurre (PW1). Post mortem examination on the dead body was conducted by Dr. Pramod Tiwari (PW7). His report is Ex.P4 in which he opined the cause of death to be asphyxia and the mode of death to be suicidal. Morgue inquiry was done by Assistant Sub-Inspector S.K. Pradhan (PW8). On the basis of morgue inquiry, First Information Report (Ex.P13) was registered. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellant and the acquitted accused persons Tijram, Nohar, Dayaram and Gayatribai for offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Charge was framed against them under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) To rope in the accused persons, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them, pleaded innocence and false implication. 1 witness has been examined in their defence.