MADHVANAND Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dtd. 20/8/2004 passed in Sessions Trial No. 151 of 2002, under Ss. 304B, 201 IPC and Sec. 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 ("the Act), by the court of Sessions Judge, Nainital. By the impugned judgment and order, the appellants Devki Devi and Bhagirathi Devi have been convicted under Ss. 304B, 201 IPC and Sec. 3/4 of the Act and have been sentenced as hereunder:-

(2.) By the impugned judgment and order, the appellants Madhvanand and Bachi Ram have been convicted under Ss. 304B, 201 IPC and Sec. 3/4 of the Act and have been sentenced as hereunder:-

(3.) The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as follows. The deceased Santoshi Devi and appellant Madhvanand were married on 8/5/1999. Appellant Bachi Ram is the father-in-law of the deceased. Appellant Devki Devi is the mother-in-law of the deceased. The appellant Bhagirathi Devi is the sister-in-law (elder brother's wife of the husband of the deceased). According to the prosecution, after marriage, the appellants demanded dowry. The deceased was pregnant, but she was killed and her body was hanged from a tree so as to show as if it was a case of hanging. This information reached to the family members of the deceased. Her uncle Hari Ram, PW 3, lodged a report on 20/1/2001 at 07:50 p.m. at Police Station Ramnagar, District Nainital. The investigation was carried out. The inquest of the deceased was conducted. Her body was found suspended from a tree. The dead body was in a seated position on the ground. The witnesses of the inquest recorded that it was not a case of hanging. It reflected, as if she was killed and hanged thereafter. The inquest report further records that from the house of the appellants upto the place of incident, there were pieces of broken bangles. The Investigating Officer ("IO") prepared the site plan, Ex. A-4. Postmortem of the dead body was conducted. According to the doctor, the death was caused as a result of asphyxia due to strangulation. After investigation, chargesheet under Ss. 304B, 201 IPC and 3/4 of the Act was filed.