CHANDRA CHUDAMANI PATNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 4.10.1996 passed by the learned Second Addl. Sessions Judge, Berhampur in Sessions Case No. 53 of 1995 (S.C.No. 275 of 1995 GDC) whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 498A IPC and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years under Section 498A IPC and one year under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act; the sentences to run concurrently. Initially, the appeal was preferred by three appellants. During its pendency, appellant No. 2 -Saraswati Patnaik having died, the appeal as against the said appellant has abated by order dated 16.5.2007. Now, the appeal is confined to appellants 1 and 3.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the marriage between Manoranjan Patnaik (appellant No. 3) and the deceased (Mamatamayee Patnaik) was solemnized on 05.8.1994. Appellant No. 1 -Chandra Chudamani Patnaik and appellant No. 2 -Saraswati Patnaik (since dead) are the father and mother respectively of appellant No. 3. At the time of settlement of the marriage appellant No. 1 demanded cash of Rs. 50,000/ -, a Bajaj Chetak scooter and other household articles as dowry. After prolonged negotiation, it was settled that a cash of Rs. 35,000/ -, a Bajaj Scooter and other household articles would be given as dowry. Appellant No. 1 received cash of Rs. 15.000/ - 3 to 4 days prior to the marriage, Rs. 5.000/ - on the date of marriage and the balance amount of Rs. 15,000/ - a few days after the marriage. The appellants were not satisfied with the said amount of dowry. Therefore, they teased the deceased and subjected her to physical and mental torture on the ground that she had not brought a colour T.V., a refrigerator and a gas oven as dowry and ultimately the deceased was forced to commit suicide. On receipt of such information, the police registered a case, proceeded with the investigation and after closure of the same submitted charge sheet against the appellants under Sections 498A/306 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Section 34 IPC.

(3.) IN order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and proved 29 documents marked as Ext. 1 to 29 and six material objects. The appellants examined none in support of their plea, but relied on 20 documents marked as Ext. A to Ext. T.