MUKESH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 2nd July, 2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ganj-Basoda in sessions Trial No. 84/2000, by which the appellant has been convicted under section 304-B of IPC and sentenced to under rigorous imprisonment for seven years and under Section 201 of IPC, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation. Both the sentences are run concurrently.

(2.) IN brief, the story of the prosecution is that on 18-2-2000, Kalyan singh (P. W. 7) lodged the report at the Police Station, Natren, informed about the death of his uncle's daughter Mithlesh Kumari who died due to burn. Merg intimation was recorded by the police. After investigation, it is found that she was married to the appellant about 8-9 months back. On the fateful night, she was along with her husband. After hearing the cry of the deceased, Umrao Singh (P. W. 9) and Niranjan (P. W. 2) went to the house of the appellant and saw that mithlesh Kumari was died. Appellant told that he killed Mithlesh Kumari. Appellant confessed that he has killed Mithlesh before Kalyan Singh (P. W. 7)and Bhupat Singh. Singh dead body of the deceased was cremated without intimation to the police. It is alleged that appellant used to torture the deceased due to demand of dowry. The crime was registered against the appellant. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the Court and the learned Trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant accordingly as stated in above para one of this judgment.

(3.) IT is submitted by the Counsel for the appellant that the learned trial Court has not appreciated the evidence properly and has wrongly convicted the appellant. The learned Trial Court has not accepted the extrajudicial confession of the appellant. There is no evidence that there was demand of dowry 'soon before her death'. Counsel for the appellant also submitted that there is delay in lodging the FIR.