KASHIRAM Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SOLE appellant Kashiram was charged and prosecuted for commission of offence under section 498A and 306 IPC. on the ground that on 27.4.1999 at noon in village Raitpura he had subjected her wife Prabha to cruelty and abeted her to commit suicide. Learned trial Court, after appreciating the evidence available on record, has found the charges proved against the appellant and has, accordingly, awarded punishment of two years under section 498-A and three years punishment under section 306 IPC. Both sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is as under : On the relevant date, that is on 27th April, 1988, accused husband of the deceased was working on his agriculture field. It was about noon when Prabha Devi came from home taking meals for the accused. Accused roused to anger as she did not bring meals in time since he was hungry as the could not get meals since last day. In order to give vent to his anger he gave her healing by stem of Juwar (Thatera). Thereafter, Prabha went to her house and committed suicide by strangulating herself by hanging a rope. Police. Lighora of District Tikamgarh registered a case under section 174 CrPC and after investigation it was found that the accused had subjected her to cruelty for dowry and abeted her to commit suicide. S.H.O. Registered FIR (Exhibit P-10). Postmortem was performed by Dr. H.N. Mishra who found that the death of Prabha was due to strangulation. Exhibit P-9A is his postmortem report.

(3.) THE witness was thereafter declared hostile on the other points what is disclosed by the evidence of this witness is that she was found dead and hanged. Mukundilal (PW 7) and Kalawati (PW 9) are parents of the deceased. In their lengthy statement and searching cross-examination, they say that accused used to demand dowry. She was not happy in bridegroom's house. She used to narrate to her friends about the behaviour of her husband and about demand of dowry. None of the friends has been examined. The statements of these two witnesses are full of exaggerations, contradictions and omissions and their statements have no evidentary value. In any case, they do not know about beating given by the accused to the deceased. Dr. Mishra (PW 11) had performed postmortem on the body of the deceased. PW 12 S.B. Singh Parihar is investigating Officer whose evidence is of formal nature.