LAWS(CHH)-2019-12-133

SANJAY SAO Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On December 04, 2019
SANJAY SAO Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05. 06. 2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC) Durg (C. G. ) in Sessions Trial No. 06. 2009, wherein the appellate Court convicted the accused/appellant under Sections 498- A IPC, and sentenced him to undergo R. I. for 2 year and to pay fine of Rs. 1000 with default stipulations.

(2.) In the present case, name of deceased is Saraswati Devi Sao, who was wife of the appellant. The marriage was solemnized between them 18 years back to the date of incident. After marriage, Saraswati Devi was living with her husband in her matrimonial house at Baikunthdham, Bhilai. Out of their wedlock four children were born. The appellant's attitude towards Saraswati Devi was very bad and he did not pay her any care or attention, harassing and ill-treating the deceased on account of demand of dowry. It is alleged that the appellant was having illicit relationship with other lady and whenever it was objected by Saraswathi the appellant abused, assaulted her and stated to go back from his house. Saraswati informed the incident to her parents but the family member after giving due advise and send back her to his matrimonial house. It is further case of the prosecution that the deceased could not bear the torture of her husband and on 12. 12. 2008 she committed suicide by hanging herself in her matrimonial house and died. Information to this effect was given to the Police. Thereafter, inquest on the dead- body was conducted vide Ex. P-11 followed by postmortem examination carried out by Dr. V. S. Baghel (PW-15) vide report Ex. P-12. After merg inquiry and receiving the postmortem report, FIR Ex. P-8 was registered on 14. 12. 2008 against accused/appellant under Section 306 IPC.

(3.) After completion of investigation challan was filed on 14. 12. 2008 under Section 306 IPC. However, the charge was framed by the trial Court under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC.