STATE Vs. KULDEEP & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed by the State seeking condonation of delay of 12 days in filing the appeal. The delay is condoned for the reasons mentioned in the application. The application stands disposed of. 1. The State seeks leave to appeal against judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 25.10.2010 in Sessions Case No.66/2009. The respondent/accused were charged with having committed the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 304B IPC.

(2.) The prosecution s allegations were that on 10.02.2007, the deceased (hereafter referred to as Meenu ) married Kuldeep, the son of the other two accused Jagdish and Champa. The fourth accused Anju is his sister-in-law (Jethani). The prosecution alleged that Meenu was subjected constant harassment and cruelty which included on at least 2/3 occasions, instances of physical violence. The prosecution alleged that Meenu was beaten on 13.02.2007 and had even bled in the nose - a fact testified to by PW-7 & PW-8. The prosecution sought to prove that demands for dowry articles which included Rs. 50,000/-, a Motor Cycle for the accused Kuldeep and several other household articles, were made. When Meenu and her parents were unable to satisfy their demands, she was subject to cruelty daily. It was alleged that the Meenu on previous occasions visited her parents, when Kuldeep called her on telephone and abused her for not ensuring the dowry articles and an amount demands, were given and paid. It was also alleged that the Kuldeep had objected and not permitted Meenu to visit Agra even though she wanted to do so. The other instance of physical cruelty alleged was that she had been beaten and reported this on 16.04.2007.

(3.) The death of Meenu occurred on 24.04.2007. The postmortem report indicated that death was on account of hanging; ligature mark was found on her neck. The postmortem Doctor PW-4 had stated in his depositions about having found the words meri maut ka karan mera pati kuldeep hai . On the basis of these evidence and circumstances, the prosecution alleged that the accused were responsible for Meenu s death. They were arrested; after conclusion of investigation, charges were framed. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. After considering the records and the materials placed before it, the Trial Court acquitted the accused.