NEELESH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of impugned judgment and order dated 8.6.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Kanpur Nagar in Sessions Trial No.18 of 2006 (State v. Neelesh Pandey & Others), convicting accused appellant Neelesh Pandey under Sections 304-B and 498-A of IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment, with a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default thereof, one month's additional imprisonment. Further, accused appellants, Ramesh Chand Pandey, Smt. Rama Pandey and Km. Priyanka Pandey have been convicted under Sections 304-B and 498-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment, with a fine of Rs.5000/- each, in default thereof, one month's additional sentence.

(2.) In the present case, name of the deceased is Jyoti Pandey, wife of accused no.1-Neelesh Pandey. Their marriage was solemnized on 8.7.2003 and out of the wedlock, a female child was born who, as informed, is now aged about 15 years. The deceased died homicidal death on 31.3.2005. Accused Km. Priyanka Pandey is an unmarried sister-in-law (nanad) of the deceased, whereas accused Smt. Rama Pandey and Ramesh Chand Pandey are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased. On 1.4.2005, information was received by the informant, (PW-1) Raj Kumar Mishra, father of the deceased, that his daughter has closed the door of her room from inside, he rushed to the house of the accused persons and there he found the dead body of her daughter lying on a cot. He returned to his house and then had gone to the police station where he lodged FIR, Ex.Ka.10 at 08:25 am. Based on this report, FIR under Sections 498-A and 304-B of IPC read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was registered against the present accused persons and a juvenile accused Ankit Pandey. In the FIR, it is alleged that sufficient dowry was given by him to the accused persons, but yet his daughter was subjected to cruelty for demand of dowry. He has given certain previous instances in respect of demand of dowry and the settlement between two families.

(3.) Inquest on the dead body of the deceased was conducted, vide Ex.Ka.5 on 1.4.2005 and the body was sent for postmortem which was conducted on the same day by (PW-3) Santosh Narayan, vide Ex.Ka.4.