HARISHCHANDRA VERMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Amrendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Uttam Kumar Gond, learned A.G.A. were heard and lower court record was perused.

(2.) Under challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 14.7.2009 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Faizabad in Sessions Trial NO. 125 of 2006 arising out of case crime no. 172 of 2005, Police Station Taarun, District Faizabad whereby present appellant Harishchandra Verma was convicted for the offence under Section 304 I.P.C. and was sentenced with imprisonment for life and was further convicted for the offence under Section 201 I.P.C. and was sentenced with rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and six months and also with fine of Rs. 2,000/- with default stipulation of three months additional imprisonment. However, two accused persons, namely, Phoolchandra Verma and Prem Lata, who were summoned by the trial court in exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C., were acquitted of the charges levelled against them.

(3.) In brief the case of the prosecution as disclosed in the F.I.R. was that complainant Guru Prasad Verma moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. On 23.3.2005 before the C.J.M., Faizabad alleging therein that his younger sister Urmila was married with appellant Harishchandra Verma on 3.5.1995 and sufficient dowry was given in the marriage. There was demand of a motorcycle and a gold chain but because of the intervention of the relatives, the matter was pacified at that time. But Urmila (deceased) was treated with cruelty to pressurize the demand of motorcycle and the gold chain. On 23.6.2001 Harishchandra Verma after beating Urmila had turned her out from his house. He had withdrawn money, on the educational certificates of the deceased and spent the same on womanising. Under these circumstances, Urmila started living with his brother (complainant). On 7.7.2001 Harishchandra Verma filed a suit for Restitution of Conjugal Rights before the Principal Judge, Family Court. Urmila (deceased) also moved an application for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act on which an order was passed against Harishchandra Verma to make payment of Rs. 800/- as expenses of the suit and Rs. 500/- per month as maintenance pendente-lite. But the said amount was not paid by Harishchandra Verma and ultimately in the month of December, 2003 Harishchandra Verma came to the house of the complainant and accepted his mistake and thereafter Vida took place. Since then the deceased was living in the house of appellant Harishchandra as his wife. But cruel behaviour of the accused persons, in connection with the demand of dowry, continued. On 2.10.2004, the complainant got an information that the appellant, his mother and his brother Phoolchandra Verma with the intention to keep the teacher as his wife have caused the death of the deceased and thereafter had disposed of the dead body. Three sons were born out of the wedlock of Urmila and Harishchandra Verma. On 2.10.2004 and 5.10.2004, complainant Guru Prasad Verma gave applications at the police station Taarun but no action was taken thereafter on 7.10.2004, he gave an application to D.I.G., Faizabad. Inspite of the order of the D.I.G., no F.I.R. was lodged. So the complainant moved an application before the C.J.M. Faizabad and ultimately on the order of the C.J.M. Dated 7.6.2005 F.I.R. of this case was lodged and after investigation, the police filed charge sheet against appellant Harishchandra Verma only under Section 304 I.P.C.