DHIRENDRAKUMAR SOMNATHBHAI MAHANTO Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having been convicted for the offence under section 302 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment by a judgement and order dated 21.04.2012 in Sessions Case No. 8 of 2011, the present appeal has been filed by the convict. First information report at Exh 38 was lodged by one Rameshkumar Rampraveshsing, a cousin of deceased Punitadevi on 12.11.2010. According to the complainant who was a resident of Bihar and posted at Delhi, when he was at Bhuj, he received a telephonic information from his brother Rajesh that his cousin Punita, who was at Rajkot, was done to death by her in-laws. On receiving such information, he proceeded to Rajkot from Bhuj. According to the complainant, the motive behind the act of killing Punita was that her husband Dhirendra was demanding dowry of Rs. 50,000/- so that he could expand his business. According to the complainant, Punita had returned to her matrimonial home three or four months back and she was being tortured by her in-laws in order to see that she gets some money from her parents. The complaint also states that Dhirendra's elder brother Harendrakumar was also instigating his brother. Based on this complaint, investigation was carried out and a charge sheet at Exh 4 was filed before the Trial Court. The accused Dhirendra was charged for having committed offence under sections 302 and 498A of IPC. According to the charge, the accused had attacked deceased Punita with a broom with the knowledge and intention that it will cause her death. Further, as a result of this, Punita succumbed to the injuries on 11.11.2010.

(2.) The complainant Rameshkumar was examined as PW 11 at Exh 37. Rameshkumar stated that Punita was his cousin who married the accused in the year 2008. After her marriage she was staying at Bihar with her in-laws. Dhirendra, the accused was staying in Gujarat. After her marriage with Dhirendra she was not in the company of her husband due to strained matrimonial relations. According to this witness, Punita would complain about her ill-treatment to her mother who, in turn, would pass on this information to his mother. Punita's brother was in Delhi. It was through him that he came to know that Punita was done to death. This witness stated that the accused had a shop. In order to see that he could expand his business, he had demanded some amount from his in laws. Since the demand was not satisfied, Punita was done to death by her husband. This witness further stated that since he was nearby Bhuj for some work and when informed of the incident, he came to Rajkot. When he reached Rajkot, the postmortem on Punita's body was already carried out. He further stated in his testimony that it was through Punita's mother that he came to know that Punita died due to the injuries sustained on her head as her head was banged against a wall and that her hands were tied. He confirmed to having lodged the complaint at Exh 38.

(3.) This witness has been cross examined. In his cross examination he stated that he had initially given names of three persons. He stated that he had never met Punita after she had married. He admitted that he had not stated in the complaint that he came to know through Punita's mother that she had succumbed to her injuries as a result of her head being banged against the wall with her hands tied.