STATE Vs. BAL KRISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MADHU Sharma had died an unnatural death on October 10, 1996 within seven/eight months of her marriage with respondent Bal Krishan. Suspecting foul play, her father had lodged a complaint in Police Station, Akhnoor. After conducting proceedings under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a case under Section 306/498 -A RPC came to be registered against the respondents, who were challaned and subsequently tried by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, whereafter the case was transferred for disposal to learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Jammu.

(2.) THE prosecution had examined PWs Chajju Ram, Bimla Devi, Sukhdev Raj, Yash Paul, Rajinder Sharma, Dr. Gafoor Ahmed, Dr. R. K. Gupta and S. K, Razdan, as its witnesses whereas the respondents had examined DWs Bhim Sen, Yash Paul, Ganesh Dass, Thakar Dass and Balak Ram as their defence witnesses.

(3.) THE trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove that the respondents had treated the deceased with cruelty and in that view of the matter presumption under Section 114 -C (wrongly mentioned as 113 -A in the judgment) of the Evidence Act, was not attracted in the case. It accordingly acquitted the respondents.