DHANI @ DHANESWAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by one Dhani @ Dhaneswar Sahu, alongwith one Suka @ Sukuti Sahu, appellant Nos.1 and 2 respectively who are, in fact, father and son. The appellants faced their trial in the Court of Addl.Sessions Judge, Jajpur in ST Case No.29 of 1998/2 of 1998 for the offences punishable under Section 498 -A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code and were ultimately convicted under Section 498 -A I.P.C. and Section 306 read with Section 511 of I.P.C. and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/ - each, in default, to undergo R.I. for further three months for the offence under Section 498 -A I.P.C. and were further sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years each for the offence under Section 306 read with Section 511 I.P.C. and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief is that appellant No.1 married one Kamini @ Kanak on 14.7.1987. Before the marriage took place their was a demand of dowry from the side of the appellants. It is further found that one Bansidhar Sahu had acted as mediator for the marriage who settled the dowry at Rs.4000/ - in cash in lieu of a television set and in addition a sum of Rs.3000/ - for the dress of appellant No.1. Apart from that Kamini was given gold ornaments worth two and half tolas. It is alleged that the appellant No.1 received dowry as per the settlement but at the marriage altar, both the appellants demanded a table fan in addition to the items noted hereinabove. The mother of Kamini expressed her inability to provide a table fan for which appellant No.1 did not take 'Pakhal (traditional post marriage breakfast) in his in -laws house and on the day after the marriage, went away to his house taking his wife -Kamini.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge on a consideration of the entire evidence produced in course of trial, relied upon the evidence of doctors who had treated the deceased i.e. P.Ws. 17, 18 and 21 and came to hold that, the deceased died due to intestinal perforation due to septe -semic shock and the perforation was because of round worm infestation and that the death of the deceased was not due to ingestion of Sulpheric Acid. The aforesaid conclusion of the trial Court was based upon the evidence of P.Ws. 17, 18 and 21 as well as Ext.5 and 6 which reveal that the deceased was discharged from the hospital as her condition was satisfactory and her health condition has improved and therefore, "it cannot be said that she committed suicide, as suicide by itself is a completed action of killing oneself".