GUDDU Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.K. Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) Perused the record.

(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the death of the deceased was natural one as she had fallen during the course of fetching water while she was pregnant. It appears that septic developed in her body because the death of child which was in her womb at that time. It was pointed out that the post mortem examination of the deceased does not show any kind of external injury on the body of the deceased and therefore viscera was preserved. The chemical examination of viscera also does not indicate any kind of poison that might have been administered to her either by herself or by any of the accused. Argument is that in such circumstances it cannot be said that the deceased died any unnatural death which may be called suicidal or homicidal. It was also submitted that the condition of different organs that is said to have been found by the doctor during the autopsy showing congestion may be explained by the death of child in her womb and at any rate, the post mortem examination of the deceased is not conclusive on the point that she was done to death by the accused persons or that she was driven to commit suicide because of any cruelty that may have been meted out to her. Argument is that P.W.-3, P.W.-4, P.W.-5, P.W.-6, P.W.-7, P.W.-8 and P.W.-9, who are father and mother and other close relatives of the deceased have gone to the extent of completely denying the prosecution allegations and have not supported the prosecution case and their statement completely exonerated the appellant. Submission is that in view of their statements there was neither any demand of dowry nor any cruelty committed upon the deceased. Contention is that in the totality of such facts and circumstances of the case no valid incriminating presumption or guilt ought to be drawn against the appellant merely because he was the husband of the deceased. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the appellant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the appellant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. Submission is that the appellant was on bail during the course of trial which was never misused by him. Submission of counsel for the appellant is that the maximum period of sentence awarded to the appellants is ten years and the appellant is in jail since 25.20.2017 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early hearing of appeal. Counsel has attempted to point out several other inherent infirmities in the evidence and also the elements of improbability contained therein and it has been argued that with such infirmities on record there is a reasonable prospect of this appeal being allowed after final hearing takes place.