LAWS(DLH)-2013-10-504

AZIZ AHMED @ AJIT Vs. STATE

Decided On October 21, 2013
Aziz Ahmed @ Ajit Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in this case has been convicted under Section 304B and 498-A of the IPC. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25.11.2004 and the order on sentence dated 29.11.2004 by which the appellant has been convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under section 304-B and rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs.2500/- and in default thereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month under section 498-A IPC.

(2.) On the statement of the father of the deceased, Sh.Sriniwas, made on 4.3.2002 before the SDM, the present case was registered. It was stated by Sh.Srinivas that his daughter, Anita was married with Aziz Ahmed @ Ajit (appellant herein) on 18.2.2002 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The appellant has disclosed himself to be a Hindu. Articles of dowry were given at the time of marriage, as per the choice of the appellant and his daughter (deceased). Doli of his daughter had gone to Tigri, however, he was not aware of the address. On 1.3.2002 appellant and complainant's daughter, Anita had come to the house of the complainant in the evening and the appellant, Ajit had demanded Rs.40,000/- for business purposes, but the complainant had refused to oblige. Both Anita and the appellant left the house; and the appellant was furious. On the next day i.e. 2.3.2002 at about 9:00 or 9:30 a.m. Anita had telephoned and requested that some clothes be sent as her four sisters-in-law and four brothers-in-law were coming to her house, on being invited for food. Anita also demanded a cylinder and burner, which the mother of the deceased refused, but agreed to send a stove. Through her son, Pradeep, PW-4, a stove was sent to the house of Anita at Madangir where she was residing since 26.2.2002. Pradeep came back by noon but he did not know as to whether there was oil in the stove or not. She had again asked her brother to send clothes as well. When Pradeep had come to give the stove, only Anita and appellant were present in their house. In the evening again Pradeep went to the house of Anita along with two pairs of ladies clothes and two pairs of clothes for gents. Anita returned the ladies clothes and kept the clothes meant for gents. At that time she was alone in the house.

(3.) On 3.3.2002 Sh.Srinivas received a call from S.I. Kalu Ram at about 7:00 a.m. that Anita had expired due to burn injuries. He enquired from the neighbours and came to know that they had seen flames of fire, but did not hear any noise. They had seen the appellant leaving the house with the children of his previous marriage. PCR van was called and the appellant was handed over to the police. According to Sh.Srinivas (complainant) his daughter was killed by her four brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, mother-in-law and the appellant was also involved. Sh.Srinivas was unable to disclose the names of the brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law and the mother-in-law. Post-mortem of the deceased was got conducted and the case was registered under Sections 498A/420/304B IPC; site plan was prepared; and the appellant was arrested. After completion of investigation, a challan was filed.