RAJU Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-accused has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 28.04.1997 passed by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge Chhatarpur, in Sessions Trial No. 197/95, convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence of Sections 304-B and 498-A of I.P.C. with a direction to undergo RI for seven years in the earlier Section while RI for two years in later.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that, the deceased Pan Bai got married with the appellant in the year 1993 according to Hindu rituals and ritis. Subsequent to marriage, she was insisted by the appellant and his mother for brining the dowry from her parental house and on account of such demand of dowry, she was subjected to cruelty in the matrimonial home by the appellant and his mother. Before some days from the death of Pan Bai, she was also subjected to beating by means of burn sticks by the appellant in the matrimonial home. She had also apprised to the members of her parental family regarding cruel activities of the appellant and family members. On account of such unhappy incidents, on some occasion the deceased Pan Bai was brought to her parental home by his father Swami Prasad (PW- 1). Before some days from the date of her death, she was at her parental home from where the appellant after giving assurance to her father not to do cruelty with her, brought her to the matrimonial home. Where after few days on dated 06.07.1995 in the morning, when the appellant went to discharge his duties as Driver on some tractor and his mother Must. Khargi, had gone to some other village namely; Dhanna, and at that time, the deceased was all alone at residence. At about 11.50 AM on such date, it was observed by the resident of the locality that house of the appellant was burning then, the neighbors came there. The door of the house were bolted from the inside, however, the persons came there by braking the door entered in the premises but till then, Pan Bai after sustaining the burn injuries was died. On receiving the information, the appellant and his mother also came there. The appellant intimated to police on the same day on which the inquest intimation (Ex.P.6) was registered at Police out-post Chandra Nagar and on that basis, the original inquest report (Ex.P.7) was registered at Police Station Bamitha. In the course of merg enquiry, on establishing the ingredients of the abovementioned offences of Sections 304-B and 498-A of I.P.C. against the appellant and his mother then the First Information Report was registered against them at the same Police Station. In investigation, the appellant and her mother were arrested, witnesses were interrogated. On completion of the same, the appellant and his mother were charge-sheeted for their prosecution under the aforesaid offences.

(3.) SHRI Rajkamal Chaturvedi, learned appearing counsel of the appellant after taking me through the record of the trial Court along with the evidence adduced by the prosecution as well as the exhibited papers of the charge-sheet so also the impugned judgment argued that, the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the alleged case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt inspite that, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under the wrong premises. In continuation he said that, on taking into consideration the entire evidence led by the prosecution in the light of case diary statements of the witnesses examined from the parental family of the deceased, then it is apparent that for 15 days from the date of alleged incident, no member of the parental family stated any incrementing thing against the appellant or his mother and only after 15 days by fabricating false story and preparing the interrogatory statements of some witnesses, the appellant and his mother were falsely implicated in the matter. He further said that there is no convincing evidence on record showing that the deceased was subjected to any cruelty by the appellant in her life time either on account of demand of dowry or otherwise. So, firstly in the lack of such positive and admissible evidence, the appellant's conviction under Section 498-A of I.P.C. is not sustainable and in the lack of any such evidence, the appellant could not have been convicted under Section 304-B of I.P.C. In continuation he said that, undisputedly the alleged marriage of the appellant with the deceased took place within three years from the date of alleged unnatural death of Pan Bai. But there is no evidence to show that she was subjected to cruelty by the appellant on account of demand of dowry and specially there is no positive and convincing evidence showing that soon before her death she was subjected to any cruelty on account of demand of dowry by the appellant. In addition to it, the prayer for extending the acquittal to the appellant is also made on the ground that on appreciation of the evidence when the co-accused Must. Khargi, was acquitted by the trial Court, then there was no occasion with the trial Court to convict the appellant on the basis of same set of evidence and prayed for extending acquittal to the appellant by allowing this appeal.