STATE OF M P Vs. KAMLA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the State against the judgment of acquittal of the respondents under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code rendered by the Xth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in Sessions Trial No. 132/85 on 28th October, 1985.

(2.) THE facts of the prosecution case in brief are that the respondent Jagdish was married to the deceased Manoramabai on 10 -5 -1978. The respondent No. 1 Kamlabai is the mother of respondent No. 2 Jagdish. The respondents used to demand money from the deceased Manoramabai, and she was being treated cruelly on her refusal to meet the said demands. The respondents were dissatisfied with the dowry given in the marriage. Twice the respondent Jagdish sprinkled kerosene oil on the body of the deceased and asked her to set fire herself. Once organic phosphorus poison was also administered to her. Three days prior to her death, Jagannath Verma gave some papers pertaining to new gas connection to the respondent Jagdish. The respondents did not have the requisite amount of Rs. 1,500/ - to enable them to purchase the gas -connection. The respondent Jagdish, therefore, asked the deceased Manoramabai to bring this amount from her father. She was found burnt in her room. She thus, committed suicide as a result of abetment by the respondents. After five days from the alleged incident, Jagannath Verma, the father of the deceased, sent a typed report (Ex. P/5) to the Collector, Indore alleging that the respondents have committed the offence of murder of his daughter. After completion of investigation, the challan was filed. The respondents were charged under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code to which they pleaded not guilty. On trial, the Court found that the charge was not proved against the respondents and thus, recorded acquittal. The State has assailed the judgment of acquittal.

(3.) THE prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses in support of the charge framed against the respondents. The respondents have not adduced any evidence in defence, but have taken the plea that they have been falsely implicated.