LAXMI NARAYAN @ PAPPU Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed by the accused under section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code being aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.8.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Picchore, District Shivpuri in Sessions Trial No.240/2001 where by acquitting the other co -accused the appellant has been convicted under sections 306 and 498A of IPe for RI of five years with fine of Rs.1,000/ - in default of it further two months RI and two years RI with fine of Rs.500/ - in default of it further one month RI respectively under the aforesaid sections.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is short is that the deceased Sukhwati got married with the appellant before seven years. Subsequent to marriage on account of demand of TV, Fan and motorcycle from her parental family she was subjected to cruelty with harassment in the matrimonial home by her husband the appellant, her mother -in -law, father -in -law, elder brother -in -law and elder sister -in -law. Once the brother of the deceased came to her matrimonial home for taking her to parental home. At that time, he was also subjected to beating on account of not fulfilling the demand of aforesaid alleged articles. Whenever, the deceased visited her parental home she used to say about the aforesaid illegal demand of the aforesaid persons and also stated that on non -fulfilling of their demand, they may kill her. Before happening of the alleged incident, she was forcefully taken away from her parental home by the appellant. Subsequently on date 4.9.2001 a merg intimation regarding her unnatural death was registered at the instance of acquitted accused. Gokul, the father of the appellant, contended that while preparing meals suddenly on sustaining electrical shock on the neck she died. On registration of such merg at Police Station Picchore, the dead body was sent to the hospital for post -mortem. On carrying out the same, it was revealed that she died due to Asphysia as a result of hanging. In the course of inquest enquiry, on availability of some evidence the offence under sections 306 and 498A of IPC was registered against the appellant along with his father, mother, elder brother -in -law and sister -in -law. They were arrested and after holding investigation, charge sheeted for the aforesaid offence.

(3.) SHRI S.S. Rahul, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the alleged offence against the appellant by reliable and admissible evidence. In spite of this, the appellant had been convicted under the wrong premises. He further stated that the marriage of the deceased with the appellant took place before seven years from the date of her death and in such premises, the provision regarding presumption enumerated under section 113A of the Evidence Act was not applicable. In view of the available evidence, the alleged offence of the cruelty enumerated under section 498A of IPC, or the offence of abetment to commit suicide towards deceased defined under section 306 of IPC had not been proved against the appellant. In the lack of any evidence regarding offence of harassment and cruelty, the aforesaid provision of presumption could not be invoked to hold the conviction against the appellant under section 306 of IPC. By referring the deposition of the prosecution witnesses it was said that considering their omnibus statements the other implicated accused have been acquitted by the trial Court, thus on such evidence the conviction of the appellant is not sustainable. With this submission the prayer for acquittal of the appellant is made.