STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SUNEEL DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present appeal, the State has come before this Court laying challenge to Judgment dated 20.9.2010 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, HP (camp at Bilaspur) in Sessions Trial No. 9/7 of 2008, whereby respondents -accused (hereinafter referred to as 'accused' for convenience sake), who were charged with and tried for offences under Sections 498(A), 306 /34 IPC, have been acquitted.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that Rattan Lal, uncle of deceased Veena Devi lodged an FIR Ext PW -1/A dated 13.7.2008 at 7.10 hours stating that they were three brothers and eldest Roshan Lal died six years back leaving two daughters and one son. Younger daughter Veena Devi had been married to Suneel Dutt son of Rattan Lal of village Ladhyana as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. On 13.7.2008, he received a telephonic message from his son -in -law and relative Rattan Lal that Veena Devi had expired. He came with the villagers to Bharari Hospital and found Veena Devi lying dead outside the hospital. He apprehended that accused tortured the deceased physically and mentally forcing her to consume poisonous substance resulting into her death. Veena Devi used to disclose that her father -in -law, mother -in -law and brother -in -law used to give her beatings and also tortured her for bringing insufficient dowry. She also disclosed to him that she was beaten by accused when she visited her parents house. Inquest papers were prepared. Post mortem was conducted by PW -13 Dr. N.K. Sankhyan with Dr. Satish Sharma. Doctor opined that the deceased died due to asphyxia after consuming Phosphate releasing poison, as per final opinion Ext. PW -13/F. Site plan Ext. PW -15/A was prepared search of the house of accused was conducted and a Cypher -guard 10% EC bottle was recovered from the room below the kitchen of the accused. It was taken into possession vide memo Ext PW -2/A. On 20.7.2008, IO also recorded the statement of accused Suneel Kumar under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Accused got recovered a bamboo stick from the maize field and also disclosed that he gave beatings to Veena Devi with it. It was taken into possession vide Ext. PW -1/C. Investigation was completed. Challan was put in the Court after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) Prosecution has examined as many as eighteen witnesses to prove its case against the accused. Accused were also examined under Section 313 CrPC. Their case of denial simpliciter. Learned trial Court acquitted the accused. Hence, the present appeal by the State.