OMKAR NATH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Omkar Nath father of deceased Savita is aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated August 8, 2013 acquitting respondents Balbir (father-inlaw), Beermati (mother-in-law), Rajiv (husband) and Rekha (sister-inlaw/ nanad) for the offences punishable under Sections 304B/498A/34 IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the Trial Court failed to appreciate the material fact that the death of Savita was unnatural as she had hanged herself on October 22, 2003 and had suffered hypoxic brain damage due to partial hanging which resulted in her death on November 05, 2003. The version of Dr.R.K.Verma PW-2 that cerebral oedema can occur due to various reasons including disease that can lead to natural death was a general question put and the same could not be the basis to acquit the respondents. The factum of the offence was sought to be concealed by Rajiv the husband of Savita when he gave a wrong history to Dr.Vinod PW-9 and only when Dr.Vinod noticed mark on the left side of the neck of Savita that Rajiv changed the history. The finding of the learned Trial Court that the prosecution has failed to prove on record that respondents No.2 to 5 made a dowry demand is contrary to the record and the judgment impugned being perverse and illegal is required to be set aside and respondents No.2 to 5 be thus convicted.

(3.) A brief exposition of the facts is that Savita was married to respondent No.4 Rajiv on December 06, 2001. As per the statement of complainant Omkar Nath PW-2 after the marriage Savita resided at her matrimonial home at Modi Nagar with her husband, father-in-law Balbir, mother-in-law Beermati and brother-in-law Rinku. After a few days of her marriage all the accused persons used to torture Savita in connection with demand of dowry for which he used to receive phone calls from his daughter and her husband.