BHAGWATI DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Bhagwati Devi (mother -in -law) is the convict before this Court for the offence under Section 498 -A IPC. Initially, she along with Badri Dutt (father -in -law) and Prakash Mishra (younger brother -in -law) of deceased Chandra Devi were tried by learned Sessions Judge, Bageshwar for the offences of Section 498 -A and 304 -B IPC read with Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The said trial pertains to Sessions Trial No. 42 of 2001. But the trial culminated into the acquittal of Sri Badri Dutt and Prakash Mishra for all the offences, as levelled against them, whereas appellant Smt. Bhagwati Devi was found guilty, as stated hereinabove. She has appropriately been sentenced by the learned Judge.

(2.) DECEASED Chandra Devi, daughter of PW1 Dharmanand Joshi, was married to Sanjay Mishra, son of Badri Dutt Mishra, a year before the incident. She lost her life in her in -laws' house on 15.06.2001 in daytime. At that time, her husband was employed somewhere towards Bombay, and thus, only the accused persons were present in the house. She was found dead inside room, which was bolted from inside, and the same could be opened only after making attempt from the side -window. This was the reason that the accused persons, though charge -sheeted for the offence of section 304 -B I.P.C., notwithstanding, they were charged for the offence of Section 302 IPC. However, they have not been convicted by the Trial Judge for loosing the life of Smt. Chandra Devi in her in -laws house. But her mother -in -law Smt. Bhagwati Devi (appellant) has been found guilty for the offence u/s 498 -A IPC. The Court does not want to make any comment on the acquittal of the accused persons for the offences either of Section 304 -B or u/s 302 I.P.C., because the State Government has not preferred any appeal against that judgment and order of acquittal.

(3.) AS regards the offence under Section 498 (A) I.P.C., P.W 3 Smt. Hira Devi has deposed in so many words that her daughter, after marriage, visited the native house many a times within a short span of one year of her marriage. On her every visit, she made a complaint regarding the demand of dowry by her mother -in -law as well as by other accused persons. She used to weep on account of the atrocities meted out to her on the question of demand, but every time, her mother sent her back after persuading her.