RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellants /accused against the order of conviction and sentence passed against them under Sections 306 and 498-A of the I. P. C. Both the accused persons were convicted under Section 306, I. P. C. and sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rupees 500/- each. They were further convicted under Section 498-A and sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences are ordered to run concurrently. During the pendency of the appeal the accused/appellant Matadin died and his appeal abated vide order dated 20. 10. 94.

(2.) BRIEFLY narrated the facts are that the deceased Meena, daughter of PW 1 Mohandas was married to accused/appellant No. 1 Rajesh Kumar about 4 or 5 years prior to the occurrence. Matadin was her father-in-law. Both of them used to commit cruelty upon her and harass her. They demanded a sum of Rs. 1500/- as dowry. Rajesh had also written letters in this regard to Mohandas and had also extended threats. The deceased, Meena, was burnt to death by the accused persons and no intimation was given to the father. He was informed after about 10 to 15 days by Smt. Gomti Devi. He thereafter went to Police Station Mehgaon and lodged a report. Usual investigation took place and a charge- sheet was submitted against the accused/appellants. The Trial Court considered the entire evidence produced before it and concluded that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused/appellants. It, therefore, convicted and sentenced them as aforesaid. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants contended that the prosecution has chiefly relied upon the alleged dying declaration recorded by the doctor. This dying declaration could not be relied upon because the circumstances brought on record go to show that she was not in a position to give a statement. There were extensive burns as stated by the doctor in his report as well. The learned Counsel for the appellant lastly argued that in any case as the accused Rajesh is a young person and was about 20 or 21 years of age at the time of occurrence, the benefit of probation be extended to him. He has also been in jail for about 15 days. Learned Counsel for the State contended that it is one of those cases where there is ample proof of the fact that the lady was driven by the accused person to commit suicide, she was tortured for not bringing money and this fact is amply proved. There is, therefore, no justification for extending the benefit of probation.