RAVI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence dated 07.06.2014 passed by Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 9, Moradabad in Sessions Trial No. 666 of 2004 (State Vs Ravi and others), whereby the appellants, namely, Ravi, Chhajju and Smt Premwati were convicted under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. They were sentenced for life imprisonment under section 304-B I.P.C. The appellants were also sentenced for life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- each with default stipulation and further all the appellants were also sentenced for three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 498-A I.P.C. along with fine of Rs. 2000/- each with default stipulation and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, they were sentenced for one year rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 1000/- each with default stipulation. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Adumbrated facts, as per the prosecution version are that the complainant Mahendra Singh (P.W.-1) submitted a written report (Ex-Ka-1) on 25.10.2003 at P.S. Mainather, District Moradabad to the effect that marriage of his sister, namely, Meena was solemnised with appellant no. 1 Ravi seven months ago. Her sister was at her parental home on the eve of Karwachauth, and at that time she narrated that she had some altercation with her mother-in-law and her mother-in-law tried to strangulate her with the help of her chunni; and when her husband came on Karwachauth to take her back then the said fact was complained to him, on which he said that they must come to his residence, next day after Deepawali, and then he would talk on the matter, and, thereafter, he is said to have taken his wife Meena with him. It is further alleged that on 25.10.2003 at about 7.30 in the morning, it was informed on telephone by appellant no. 1 Ravi that Meena is unwell and on getting this information, the complainant is said to have contacted the appellant no. 1 Ravi, thereafter, to know the situation, and Ravi (appellant no. 1) then told the informant that Meena has died, and, thereafter, the complainant along with other family members reached at his sister's matrimonial home, where he found his sister lying dead. It is further alleged in the report that the complainant suspects that her death was committed by her husband Ravi (appellant no. 1), her father-in-law Chhajju (appellant no. 2), her mother-in-law Smt Premwati (appellant no. 3) and her brother-in-law. It is further alleged that father of the appellant no. 1 used to demand dowry and on his demand a motorcycle was given at the time of marriage.

(3.) On the basis of the said written report, the FIR (Ex-Ka-6) was lodged on 25.10.2003 at 15.45 p.m vide Case Crime No. 276 of 2003, under Sections 498A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act by Constable Clerk 279 Ramprakash Singh (P.W.-6). Investigation ensued. The post-mortem was conducted and on completion of the investigation a charge sheet (Ex-Ka-5) under Section 498-A, 304 B IPC and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act was submitted against the present appellants. Charges were framed against all the accused appellants under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on 8.12.2004. Additional charge under Section 302 IPC was framed against the appellants, namely Ravi (appellant no. 1/Husband), Chhajju (appellant no. 2/father-in-law) and Smt Premwati (appellant no. 3/mother-in-law) on 29.05.2012. The trial of accused- appellant Sanjay (brother in law of deceased) was separated on account of his being a Juvenile and he has been tried by Juvenile Justice Board.