(1.) THE appellant no. 1 Bedi and appellant no. 2 and 3 Dujja and bhaganti ( since deceased) have filed this appeal against the judgment dated 30. 11. 98 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions, Judge, Damoh in Sessions Trial No. 75/98 convicting to each of them under Section 498-A with three years RI with fine of Rs. 500, in default of depositing such fine further three months simple imprisonment.
(2.) THE facts of the prosecution case in short are that the deceased Atmarani @ Genda Bai was married with the appellant no. 1 bedi Lal before 4-5 years ago from the date of the incident, i. e. 24. 3. 98. It is undisputed fact on record that Genda Bai did not have any issue out of the wedlock. According to further case due to such reason the appellant no. 1 her husband and the deceased appellants, her mother in law and father in law were used to commit cruelty with her. She also told some incident of Makar Shankranti to her mother. As per further case due to such harassment and cruelty said Genda Bai by pouring the kerosene on dated 23. 4. 98 set fire and committed suicide. On giving such information by one Dhanpat the merge intimation regarding such unnatural death was registered at Police station Tendukheda. After preparing inquest memo and the spot map the death body was sent to the hospital where its postmortem was carried out, according to which said Genda Bai had died because of burning injuries. On making enquiry of the merge an offence under section 498 A and 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC was registered against the appellants. Interrogatory statement of witnesses were recorded. After holding investigation the appellant no. 1 alongwith the deceased appellants were charge sheeted for the offence under Section 498-A, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC. On framing charges of the alleged offence against the appellants, they abjured the guilt, on which the trial was held. On appreciation of the evidence by acquitting the appellants from the charge of Section 306 r/w Section 34 they have been convicted under Section 498-A with the punishment, as stated above, on which the appellants have come forward with this appeal with the prayer of their acquittal. In pendency of the appeal, the appellant no. 2 and 3 have died, hence the appeal was held to be abated against them.
(3.) LEARNED appearing counsel of the appellant Shri B. J. Chourasia after taking me through the evidence led by the prosecution and the papers exhibited by it said that after giving acquittal to the appellants from the charge under Section 306 of IPC. On appreciation of the same evidence the appellant no. 1 has been wrongly convicted under Section 498-A of IPC. By referring the deposition of parents of the deceased namely Karelal (PW-1) and Sona Bai (PW-3) he said that they have not stated any incriminating thing against the appellants with respect of the cruelty committed by them against the deceased. As per submission if parents have not stated anything then Shobha Ram (PW-4), the maternal uncle of the deceased who was not residing with the parental family of the deceased could be believed to draw the inference that deceased was subjected to cruelty by the appellant no. 1 and in such premises, he is not reliable. So far Jithua Kotwar (PW-12) is concerned, he said that looking to the inconsistency between his court deposition and the case diary statement Ex. D-4 and also the inconsistency with the deposition of Ujayari Bai (PW-5), the deposition of Jithua Kotwar could not be relied on to convict the appellant. Besides this there is no other evidence showing that the appellant no. 1 has committed any alleged offence with the deceased. In alternative he said that the appellant has already suffered three months imprisonment in jail and he is facing the mental agony of such prosecution since 1998. Therefore, if the case is not found fit for acquittal from the alleged charge, then by adopting some lenient view his jail sentence be reduced upto the period for which he has already undergone during trial and prayed to allow his appeal accordingly.