NIRAJAN KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A marriage was solemnized between Smt. Sushma and Shri Ashok Kumar on 4/5/2001. Smt. Sushma died on 25. 6. 2004, otherwise than in normal circumstances. An FIR 238/2004 dated 25/6/2004 was registered u/s 498a/304b/34 IPC against Shri Ashok Kumar at P. S. Bhajan Pura. The FIR records the allegation of the father of the deceased girl alleging dowry demands and harassment of the deceased. There was also reference to the husband of the deceased having some extra marital relationship. After investigation was completed, charge-sheet was filed against Shri Ashok Kumar, husband; his father Shri Braham Singh; his mother Smt. Sumitra and one Shri Niranjan Kumar, petitioner herein, u/s 498a/304b/34 IPC. A diary of the deceased was also recovered. Further statements were recorded, including of the mother of the deceased, who gave details about the dowry demands and torture and harassment by the family members of the husband in order to get more dowry in the second marriage. Statement was made by Smt. Sheela Arya, the mother, before the SDM. Pursuant thereto, necessary action was directed to the IO.

(2.) IN the statement, the mother has deposed that the deceased daughter had complained to her that the petitioner herein, who is the son of the Jeth of the Bua of Shri Ashok Kumar (husband), used to keep on inciting her in-laws and husband of the deceased to get rid of the deceased girl and that he would arrange a marriage in a high profile family which would provide them with a car. It is also alleged that the petitioner used to advise the boy's family members to inform the deceased parents that she had consumed something wrong and on their finding that nothing had gone wrong, they would undergo the harassment. The petitioner is also alleged to have advised how to extract money from the parents of the deceased. The statement further recorded that the deceased daughter used to say that the petitioner would murder her. The statement of the complainant Dr. Dharampal Arya (father of the deceased) also refers to the role played by the petitioner.

(3.) THE trial court framed charges on 7. 7. 2006 against all the four accused for offences under Section 498a/304b/34 IPC. The order of framing charges shows that insofar as the petitioner is concerned, it was stated that he was a relative, being the brother-in-law of the deceased, and there was common intention of the parties.