MEERA BAI Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved with the judgment dated 7th June, 2002 rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ganj basoda, District Vidisha (M. P.) in Sessions trial No. 34/2002, the appellants have preferred this appeal, whereby the learned judge while acquitting the appellants from the charge under Section 302 or 302/34 of i. P. C. and under Section 304b of I. P. C. or 304b/34 of I. P. C. , has convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 306 of I. P. C. and has imposed 10 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of rs. 100 on each of the appellants.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that on 8th november, 2001, Ramkunwar Bai died due to burn injuries. The appellants are mother-in-law and husband respectively. After receiving the information, marg No. 71/01 was registered. Upon inquiry thereafter Crime no. 725/2001 was registered against the appellants for the offence punishable under section 304-B/34 of I. P. C. at police station ganj Basoda, District Vidisha. After completing the investigation, challan was filed. The case was committed and appellants have been tried for the aforesaid offence along with offence of murder under Section 302 of I. P. C. or 302/34 of I. P. C. but they have been acquitted by the learned Judge from the aforementioned charges and without there being a charge under Section 306 of i. P. C. , they have been convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

(3.) THE only contention of Shri R. K. Goyal, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants is that admittedly there was no charge under Section 306 of I. P. C. and the appellants were not tried for the same. The offence under Section 306 of I. P. C. is not minor offence of the offences of murder or dowry death which is punishable under sections 302 and 304b of I. P. C. Hence, even with the aid of the provision mentioned in section 222 of Cr. P. C. , they could not be convicted for the aforementioned offence. He has further submitted that not only no charge was framed for that offence, but no questions or incriminating circumstances in that regard, were put to the appellants during their examination under Section 313 of cr. P. C. In that way the appellants have become prejudiced. Hence, they deserve acquittal.