AMAR NATH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26th February, 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby he discharged respondents 2 to 5 who were charge -sheeted by the police for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 304 -B/498 -A/34 of the Indian Penal Code( ,,IPC in short). The petitioner is aggrieved by their discharge since according to him they had caused the ,,dowry death of his young daughter Sushma and had been wrongly discharged by the Additional Sessions Judge.

(2.) THE daughter of the petitioner, Sushma, was married to respondent no.2 Mohan on 16th January, 2001 and within seven years of her marriage she died on 13th May, 2006. Her parents did not consider the death of their daughter to be a natural death. So, they complained that right from the second day of marriage of their daughter her husband and his parents had started harassing her because of her having brought insufficient dowry from her parental home and were demanding dowry in cash. The incidents of her harassment increased day by day and to such an extent that a case under Section 498 -A IPC was got registered by her against her in -laws, respondent nos. 2 to 7 herein, in the year 2002 vide FIR No.550/2002. However, on the assurance being given by the accused persons that the deceased daughter of the petitioner shall not be harassed in future, which assurance according to the prosecution case was never intended to be honoured and was given only to get rid of the criminal case, there was a compromise between the complainant side and the accused in -laws of the deceased due to which that criminal case was quashed by this 24th Court vide order dated March, 2005 passed in Crl.M.C.No.946/2005. Thereafter the in -laws of the deceased again started harassing her and did not even give her proper food to eat and was forced to starve. The petitioner further claimed that on 13th May, 2006 at about 4 p.m. he received a call from his son - in -law and first told him that his daughter was not well and then had said that she had died. In view of the aforesaid allegations leveled by the parents of the deceased the police registered a criminal case under Sections 304 -B/498 -A/34 IPC.

(3.) THE learned trial Court discharged all the four charge -sheeted accused vide impugned order. The father of the deceased then filed this revision petition impleading not only the four acquitted accused but two more relatives of the husband of the deceased were also impleaded as respondent nos. 6 and 7 even though they were not even charge -sheeted by the police.