CHETRAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved of the judgment dated 18/5/2015 passed by the Sessions Judge, Anuppur in ST No.08/2013, whereby the present appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

(2.) In brief the facts of the case are that on 17.9.2012 appellant Chetram informed the Police Station Jaithari District Anuppur that on 16.9.2012 from around 2-3 PM till 6 O'clock in the morning of 17.9.2012 his wife Mamta Bai was missing, who committed suicide in the morning on 17.9.2012 by hanging on a tree. The marg intimation (Ex.P-3) was recorded by PW-2 Kartar Singh.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated inasmuch as cruelty or any abetment has not been proved by the prosecution, and as such there was no reason for the learned Judge of the trial Court to convict the present appellant under Section 304-B of IPC. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the demand of dowry has also not been proved and despite the fact that the family members of the deceased were not at all in a position to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as dowry regarding which even the appellant knew, thus the finding arrived at by the learned Judge of the trial Court that there was a demand at the instance of the appellant is perverse. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that it is an admitted fact that the appellant as well as the parents of the deceased belong to lower strata of the society had not even seen Rs.50,000/- thus there was no question that the appellant would harass the deceased for a sum of Rs.50,000/- which he also knew that she or her parents would not be able to fulfill, hence it is submitted that the impugned judgment being perverse is liable to be set aside.