DEVENDRA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Virendra Kumar lodged a complaint to Station Officer, Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar on 01.06.1998, regarding the killing of his sister Mamta. According to the informant, his sister Mamta alias Munni was married to Devendra alias Bittu s/o Beni Prasad about 21/2 years ago, according to Hindu rites and rituals. Mamtas's in-laws were not happy with the articles, which were given in the marriage. Mamta's husband Devendra deserted Mamta. On this, the relatives intervened. Mamta was again sent to her matrimonial house. On 30.05.1998, Devendra reached Mamta's parental home. Devendra demanded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- and a scooter from Mamta's mother, who said that Mamta's brothers were not present at the residence and he (Devendra) should talk to them in this regard. Despite the unwillingness of mother of Mamta to send Mamta to her matrimonial home, Devendra took his wife with him on 31.05.1998. Mamta was administered poison on the same day. On having come to know of death of Mamta, informant Virendra Kumar went to his sister's matrimonial home, where her dead body was lying. On the basis of said complaint (Ext. Ka-1), chik FIR (Ext. Ka-12) was lodged at Police Station Laksar on 01.06.1998, at 06:15 A.M., which was registered as Case Crime No. 86 of 1998 in respect of offence punishable under Section 304B of IPC. The investigation began thereafter. Investigating Officer PW13 Brij Pal Singh Rathi (CO) was entrusted with the investigation of the case. PW13 took the statement of the informant on 02.06.1998, inspected the place of incident and prepared site plan (Ext. Ka-10). Crushed tablet was found from the bag of the victim, wrapped in a cloth and kept inside an empty matchbox, a memo (Ext. Ka-11) whereof was prepared. PW13 also took statements of Smt. Sangeeta, Ashok, Ajmer Singh, Parvati, Ram Nath Gupta, Vinod Kumar, Veer Singh, Fazal Hasan, Ramjani and others on different dates. On 05.06.1998, accused Devendra alias Bittu was arrested. The articles were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical analysis. On being satisfied that the accused Devendra alias Bittu committed the offence, a charge sheet (Ext. Ka-13) was filed against him.

(2.) When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, charge for the offence punishable under Section 304B of IPC was framed against accused Devendra alias Bittu, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. As many as 13 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. They were PW1 Virendra Kumar, PW2 Ashok Kumar s/o Ram Nath, PW3 Smt. Parvati, PW4 Ashok Kumar s/o Phool Singh, PW5 Dr. R.R. Verma, PW6 Fazal Hasan, PW7 Vinod Kumar, PW8 Veer Singh, PW9 Ramjani, PW10 S.I. Kirpal Singh, PW11 Raghuveer Sharan, PW12 Ram Avtar and PW13 Circle Officer Brij Pal Singh Rathi. DW1 Smt. Rekha and DW2 Dr. Vinay Kumar Gupta were examined in defence. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in reply to which the accused Devendra alias Bittu said that he was falsely implicated in the case. After considering the evidence on record, learned trial court convicted accused Devendra alias Bittu for the offence punishable under Section 304B of IPC. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Aggrieved against said order of conviction and sentence, present criminal appeal was preferred by the convict.

(3.) The postmortem on the dead body of the deceased was conducted by PW5 Dr. R.R. Verma. He proved postmortem report (Ext. Ka-4) and said that since cause of death could not be ascertained hence, viscera was preserved.