MAHESH GAUTAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal appeal has been maintained by the appellant-accused-convict (hereinafter to be called as "the accused") against the judgment dated 15th May, 2009, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan, District Solan, H.P., in Sessions trial No. 4-NL/7 of 2008/06, whereby co-accused Rameshwar Dass Gautam, Nirmala Gautam and Rajwanti Gautam were acquitted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498-A, read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter to be called as "IPC") and there is no appeal against them, whereas learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the present appellant for commission of offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498-A of IPC.

(2.) The allegations on the accused, as per the prosecution story are that after his marriage with the deceased, he started ill treating and humiliating her on account of the reason that she has not brought sufficient dowry. The accused also demanded the land from the father of the deceased. The accused was also not satisfied with the deceased, as she could not give birth to a child and had adopted daughter of her brother. It has been alleged that on account of cruelty meted out to the deceased by the accused, ultimately, she consumed heavy dose of Barbiturate, owing to which, she fell unconscious. Firstly no medical aid was provided to her, however, on arrival of the father of the deceased accompanied by some other persons, she was shifted to PGI, Chandigarh, where on the next day she died. Statement of the father of the deceased was recorded, who also produced written complaint, on the basis of which, FIR was registered. Post mortem of the deceased was conducted and viscera was sent for chemical analysis. After report of chemical analysis, it was found that the deceased had consumed heavy dose of Barbiturate medicine, which she was taking in routine for cure as regular treatment. After completion of investigation, challan was presented in the Court, under Sections 306 and 498-A, read with Section 34 of IPC.

(3.) The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as eighteen witnesses. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr. P.C., in which they denied the case of the prosecution in its entirety. In defence, one witness was examined on behalf of the accused persons.