RAJU Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge herein is to the judgment and order of conviction dated 01/02.02.2010 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital in S.T. No. 34 of 2007, State v. Raju & others, whereby the accused/appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for twelve years' u/s. 304B IPC, two years' S.I. u/s. 498A IPC and one year's S.I. u/s. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act nay certain amounts of fine. An FIR was lodged by PW1 Bhagwan Ram on 17.9.2006 stating that his sister Rekha was married with the appellant/accused six years' ago as per Hindu rituals. Various items including gold/silver jewellery were given in dowry as per status but the accused and his family members were not satisfied with the same, and soon after the marriage, she was subjected to various atrocities and maltreatment at the hands of accused. Persuasions too were made on the part of complainant but the same could not yield any result. Rather, a demand of Rs. 50,000/ - in cash besides a motorcycle was continued. On 31.8.2006, accused/appellant along with 2 his wife came at the house of complainant where he demanded dowry and on non -fulfillment of the same, he started beating his wife at her parental house itself. On being persuaded, accused brought the victim on the next day but he gave a threat that in case the demand is not satisfied within ten days, they would not find Rekha alive. On the date of report, two boys came at complainant's house and informed that Rekha has died. On this information, complainant along with his family members and villagers came at her in -laws house where she was found dead. Thereafter, the police came into motion. The inquest report (Ex. Ka -3) was prepared wherein it was stated that the dead body was found in the house of accused/appellant. The matter was investigated which resulted into submission of a chargesheet against the accused/appellant, as also his family members u/s. 498A/304B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The charge was subsequently levelled against the accused persons.

(2.) PROSECUTION , in support of its case, examined PW1 Bhagwan Ram (complainant), PW2 Kundan Ram (uncle of deceased), PW3 Laxman Ram (deceased's cousin brother), PW4 Dr. M.S. Martoliya (who conducted autopsy), PW5 Head Moharrir Ram Singh, PW6 Harvir Singh (Tehsildar at the relevant time) and PW7 D.P. Juyal (I.O. of the case). Subsequent thereto, the statements of accused were recorded u/s. 313 Cr.P.C.

(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. At this stage, we deem it just and proper to mention the ante -mortem injuries found on the person of deceased, recorded by PW4 Dr. M.S. Martoliya which reads as under: - -