CHANDRASEKHAR MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Chandrasekhar Mohanty has filed this appeal challenging the judgment and order dtd. 4/5/2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC-1), Bhadrak in Sessions Trial No.75/141 of 2011 in acquitting the accused persons i.e. respondent nos.2 to 6 of the charges under Sec. 498-A/304-B/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that the deceased Sanjukta Nayak (hereinafter 'the deceased') married to respondent no.6 Dwarika Prasad Nayak on 15/7/2010 as per Hindu rituals and there was a demand of Rs.50,000.00 and other articles including one motor-cycle by the accused persons from the parents of the deceased. Though the father of the deceased fulfilled all the demands raised by the accused persons, but so far as the demand of motor-cycle is concerned, he promised to give it after the marriage. It is the further prosecution case that since the demand of motor-cycle could not be fulfilled after marriage, the deceased was subjected to physical and mental torture in that connection by the in-laws' family members of the deceased. It is the further case of the prosecution that the respondent no.6 kidnapped one girl and left for Kolkata and hearing such news, the father of the deceased came to the house of the accused persons but by the time he came, he found that the deceased had already consumed poison and immediately the deceased was shifted to District Headquarters Hospital, Bhadrak and in course of treatment, the deceased died. One U.D. case was registered in Bhadrak (T) police station, inquest over the dead body of the deceased was held and autopsy was done in District Headquarters Hospital, Bhadrak from which it came to light that the deceased consumed organo phosphorus poison. The father of the deceased lodged a written report before the Inspector in-charge of Tihidi police station on 15/3/2011, which was treated as F.I.R. and accordingly, Tihidi P.S. Case No. 61 of 2011 was registered against the respondent nos.2 to 6 and on conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted under Sec. 498-A/304-B/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) The learned trial Court discussed the evidence of the witnesses and came to the conclusion that so far as the charge under Sec. 498-A of I.P.C. is concerned, there is no specific allegation against any of the accused persons that they tortured the deceased and caused cruelty to her. Further, the allegations are omnibus in nature and it has not been established by the prosecution that respondent no.6, the husband of the deceased kept illicit relationship with another girl and left the village with her and accordingly, the learned trial Court held that the prosecution has not established the charge under Sec. 498-A of the I.P.C. against the accused persons.