RAMJAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 31.3.2005 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Ajmer, Camp Beawar in sessions case No. 20/04 (11/04 old number) whereby they have been convicted under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and they have been sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500 under Section 498A IPC and under Section 304B IPC the accused appellant Kishan has been sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment whereas the other two accused appellants Ramjan and Rasul have been sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The case arises out of a report Ex.P1 lodged at about 7.15 p.m. on 27.10.2003 at the police station Masooda, district Ajmer by Mishri PW 3 wherein it was alleged that 'Muklava' of Anita was performed with her husband Kishan (the accused appellant) and thereafter the husband told his wife that her colour was black and her parents did not give anything and, therefore, she could go elsewhere or otherwise he would kill her. When Anita came back to her parents' house then she disclosed this to her father and brother. When the accused appellant Kishan came on leave in the month of October he became angry on seeing Anita and abused her and a few days before Diwali asked her mother and brother to give dowry or to take her back with them. Thereafter Anita was found dead on ' 27.10.2.003. According to the .post-mortem report Ex.P7 Anita died due to drowning. A case under Sections 498A, 304B IPC was registered and after necessary investigation a challan was filed against the accused appellants under Sections 498A, 302, 304B IPC, Charges under Sections 498A, 302, 3048 IPC were framed against the accused appellant Kishan whereas against the accused appellants Ramjan and Rasul charges were framed under Sections 498A and Sections 302, 304B read with Section 34 IPC. The accused appellants pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined as many as 21 witnesses whereas the accused appellants did not lead any evidence in defence. Learned trial Court by the impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as described hereinbefore. Aggrieved, the accused appellants have filed this appeal.

(3.) Heard learned counsels for the parties.