STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. SATYAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 19.9.91 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh in Sessions Trial No.109/89 whereby, the accused/respondents have been acquitted of the charges punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of I.P.C.

(2.) According to the prosecution story, the marriage of deceased Gayatri was performed in the month of March, 1987 with Ravindra, who is son of respondent No.1 Satyawati and brother of respondent No.2 Yatendra. At the time of marriage, there was no dispute over the dowry. When Gayatri reached at the house of her husband, the respondents/accused demanded motorcycle and when the motorcycle was not provided, they used to beat Gayatri. She disclosed this fact to her mother and father. When Har Narayan, who is father of Gayatri, raised an objection to the father-in-law of the deceased, he assured him that nobody will torture Gayatri. In the month of September, 1988 Gayatri came to village Dighoda with Yatendra and on 12.11.88 Ravindra, told his wife Gayatri to go with him and at that time, Gayatri was also ready to go with her husband, but respondent Satyawati refused to send Gayatri with her husband. Some hot talks had taken place between Satyawati and her daughter-in-law and on 12.11.88 during the night time, Gayatri ablazed herself. Ravindra tried to save her. Thereafter, the matter was reported to Police. Since it was not possible to send Gayatri in the hospital immediately, therefore, Dr. P.N. Magraiya recorded the dying declaration of Gayatri. Thereafter, she was sent to District Hospital, Tikamgarh where, Dr. Rajiv Saxena recorded her another dying declaration in which, she made certain allegations against the respondents.

(3.) After recording the second dying declaration, the merg intimation was recorded. Thereafter, investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officer and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The case was committed to the Sessions Court.