NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS have been convicted under Section 304-B and sentenced to 10 years' R1 and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo R. I. for six months, under Section 498-A but no sentence is awarded and they have also been convicted under Section 201, IPC and sentenced to 3 years R1 and fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to further undergo R. I. for three months wide judgment dated 27. 11. 2001 passed in S. T. No. 274/1999 by Additional Sessions Judge, Gohad against which they have filed this appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) ACCORDING to prosecution, on 21. 3. 1999, Rajbahadur Singh resident of village Ghamori, P. S. Mhou, District Bhind along with Ramratan and Jagannath lodged the report to Police Station Chhimka Gohad that his daughter Mahadevi (deceased) was married to Siyaram-appellant No. 2 on 13. 5. 1994. It was further stated that after marriage she was maltreated by the appellants and his mother Tussabai. On 30. 10. 1995, deceased Mahadevi wrote a letter to her father from her maternal uncle's house that her father-in-law and mother-in-law have turned her out from the house and whole day and night they are quarrelling and they have also kept her belongings, clothes and ornaments and her brother-in-law (Devar) has left her at her maternal uncle's house and had requested her father to come and meet her as she was in a state of shock. She has further made a complaint in the letter that she used to be harassed and given beating by the appellants. Thereafter, Rajbahadur went to the house of Nathu at village Chhimka and asked as to why his daughter had been turned out. Appellant Nathu Singh told that he had not received Rs. 50,000/and motorcycle in dowry. Rajbahadur told that he had given dowry according to his means and now he has no source-of income to give further more dowry. Thereafter, deceased Mahadevi lived with her parents for about two years. Thereafter there was Panchayat in the village and appellant Nathu assured him that now he will not harass or ill-treat his daughter and took her away but said that he should send motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/ -. In the report, it was further stated that on 13. 3. 1999 he came to know through Vedram that his daughter Mahadevi has been killed by her in-laws. After hearing the news he rushed to village Chhimka along with villagers and relatives and enquired as to how her daughter had expired. The appellant told him that they have killed his daughter on account of not fulfilling the demand of dowry. They have also cremated her without giving intimation to the complainant or to his family members. On the basis of aforesaid report crime was registered under Sections 304-B and 201, IPC. Matter was investigated. Site plan was prepared. Ashes and some bones along with a blouse and clothes were recovered from pyre. Appellants were arrested and charge-sheet was filed.

(3.) DURING trial appellants abjured their guilt. Under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, appellant Nathu took the defence that deceased Mahadevi was ill and she had died due to illness and younger daughter of Rajbahadur had remained in their house during the period of illness of Mahadevi and he has been implicated falsely. Appellant No. 2 Siyaram also took the same defence that Mahadevi was ill and she was treated at Gohad and by the doctor of Gohad, she was referred to Gwalior and when she was being taken to home in a bullock cart, she died at her house, and on earlier occasion her younger sister had also remained with her. This defect was also taken that intimation of her death was given to Jagannath, maternal grand father of deceased through messenger and they had told that they are coming. They waited but on the insistence of villagers her body was cremated and next day Rajbahadur, Jagannath and other 5-10 relatives had reached in the village and they demanded money for not lodging the report. Other accused persons have also taken the defence that they were not present at the spot and they were in their house and they have been implicated falsely.