BABITA Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the revisionists, Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

(2.) The revisionists have preferred this criminal revision against the judgment and order dtd. 2/1/2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.-O.A.W.), Jhansi in Case No. 663 of 2020, (State of U.P. Vs. Kamal Yadav and others), under Ss. 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Sec. 3/4 of D.P. Act, whereby the application U/s 227 Cr.P.C. moved by the revisionists has been rejected.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the daughter of opposite party no.2, namely, Pooja Yadav was solemnized with Kamal Yadav on 7/12/2019 according to Hindu Rituals and Rites. At the time of marriage, the opposite party no.2 gave dowry as per his capacity. However, after sometime, the family members of her in-laws started mentally and physically harassing the daughter of opposite party no.2 for demanding additional dowry demand of Rs.5.00 lacs. On 24/7/2020, the daughter of opposite party no.2 was murdered by the accused persons due to non-fulfillment of additional dowry demand, therefore, the F.I.R. has been lodged on 25/7/2020 against as many as seven named accused persons including the present revisionists under Ss. 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Premnagar, District-Jhansi. Thereafter, the post-mortem of the deceased was conducted on 25/7/2020, in which, the cause of death of the deceased is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging and the viscera was preserved for chemical analysis and as per the Viscera Report dtd. 21/9/2020, no poison was found.