PERIASAMY Vs. STATE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has arisen out of the judgment passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Salem, on 30.1.2003 in S.C. No. 161 of 1993, convicting the Appellant/first accused under Section 304B, IPC and sentencing him to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is as follows:

(3.) Challenging the conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Court, the learned Counsel for the Appellant would contend that there is no evidence for demand of dowry, that too, soon before her death, in connection with the marriage. He further submits that the evidence of PW3-Chellammal, an eyewitness, is not trustworthy and reliable. The report of RDO also not proved that there is a demand of dowry. He relied upon the decisions reported in State of Orissa v. Brahmananda Nanda, 1976 CrLJ 1985, Niranjan Mohapatra and Anr. v. Stare of Orissa, 1998 CrLJ 630, Sham Lal v. State of Haryana and Ors., 1997 CrLJ 1927, Biswajit Haider & Babu Haider and Ors. v. Stare of West Bengal,2007 2 MadLJ 376, and prayed for the acquittal of the accused and allowing of the appeal.