JANKI BAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28-8-2002, passed by VIth Addl Sessions Judge, Bhind in Sessions Trial No. 28 of 2001 convicting appellants 1 to 3 under S. 498-A of I.P.C. and sentencing them to suffer RI of one year each and fine of Rs. 1000/- (Rs. one thousand each) in default, two months RI and convicting appellant No. 4 under S 304-B of I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer seven years RI, the appellants have knocked the door of this Court by preferring this appeal under S 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) In brief, the case of the prosecution is that Nisha (hereinafter referred to as the deceased') got married with Yatendra Singh alias Kallu. The accused persons were not satisfied by the dowry given by parents of the deceased and after the marriage, they made demand of dowry and started ill-treating the deceased. The deceased was pressurized to bring dowry. The deceased when used to come to her parents house used to tell her parents that she is being ill-treated on account of insufficient dowry. It is further case of the prosecution that Rama Devi who is younger sister of deceased got married after four years of the marriage of the deceased and in that marriage, parents of the deceased gave scooter and television set, as a result of which, the accused became annoyed and made a demand of television set and scooter. She was also pacified that in case, her parents will not satisfy the demand of television set and scooter, they will not allow her to live in the house All these facts were narrated by the deceased to her parents at their house but on account of paucity of funds, Anokhe Singh (P.W. 2) (father of the deceased) could not satisfy the demand, as a result of which, accused persons again started their cruelsome behavior towards the deceased. On account of cruelsome behavior of the appellants, the deceased was living with her parents. On 27-7-2000, the accused-Yatendra Singh went to the house of his father-in-law and asked the deceased to accompany him. At that juncture, the parents oi the deceased were not in the house and her younger sister was present. Despite the deceased resisted, the accused-Yatendra Singh over powered and took her forcibly On 5-2-2000, one boy namely Shatrughan of the village of accused persons came to the house of the parents of the deceased and told them that on 4-2-2000, the deceased has passed away in village Motipura which is her nuptial house. On receiving this sad information, parents of the deceased went to the house of the accused persons where, they did not find the accused persons as lock was inserted in the house. The village people told them that the cremation of the deceased has been done. The accused persons did not send any information to the parents of the deceased in regard to her death. On 4-2-2000 the deceased admitted in the Distt Hospital in Bhind and was brought by her brother-in-law (Devar) Lokendra Singh. The deceased was Semi unconscious and in the night, she passed away. Eventually, the ward boy of the hospital, Chakresh Kumar went to the police station along with a memorandum of the doctor and informed the police in regard to the death of the deceased. In this manner, the police arrived in the hospital and the dead body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem. The viscera of the deceased was preserved and sent for chemical examination. In the report, presence of aluminium phosphate was affirmed.

(3.) The investigating agency recorded statements of the witnesses and arrested accused persons and after doing needful, a charge-sheet was submitted in the competent Court which on it's turn committed the case to the Court of Session from where, it was received by trial Court for the trial.