SANTOSH KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under section 397 / 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against order dated 19.3.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Jaunpur in Sessions Trial No.271 of 2006, State v. Santosh & others arising out of case crime no.7 of 2004, P.S. Buxa, District Jaunpur, whereby the application 43 kha for discharge, moved on behalf of the revisionists - accused, was rejected and learned trial court directed framing of the charge under sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the revisionists.

(2.) After investigation, charge sheet was submitted by the police and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where the applicants moved an application for discharge on the ground that after marriage, the deceased desired further studies and she took admission in Raj Bahadur Post Graduate College, Gulalpur in B.A. Part - I. Accused Santosh Kumar Yadav was also studying in the same college. The examinations were going on. Suddenly, on 20.3.2004, Reena Devi got ill and suffered severe stomachache, vomiting and diarrhoea. She was treated by Dr. Vijay Kumar and thereafter she was taken to Jaunpur to Dr. R.P. Yadav. She was admitted in the nursing home, but she could not recover and died in the morning of 21.3.2004. Her parents were informed and information regarding death of Reena Devi was given at P.S. Buxa. The deceased was three months pregnant. On postmortem, no visible injury was found on the person of the deceased and the viscera report was also negative and, therefore, no offence was made out.

(3.) Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submitted that the deceased was married on 25.5.2003 and died on 21.3.2004 in her sasural under suspicious circumstances and before her death, she was continuously being harassed by the revisionists on account of demand of colour T.V., fridge, motorcycle etc. as dowry. It was further submitted that a tape and needle were found at the time of inquest on the right hand of the deceased, which could only show that some treatment was done, but it does not disclose any illness. There is no medical evidence on record to show any illness and it is for the accused to prove by defence evidence that deceased met her death on account of illness.