AMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) YOUNG bride Santosh was found murdered under abnormal circumstances in the morning of Holi Festival. Incidentally it was her first festival of the colours in her in-laws house. The appellants three in number, were placed on trial for having committed dowry death of Santosh before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2. Alwar in Sessions Case No. 32/98. Learned Judge vide judgment dated December 8, 1998 convicted and sentenced each of them as under:- U/s. 304b IPc to suffer Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to further suffer six Months Simple Imprisonment. U/s. 498a IPc to suffer Three Years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer Three Months Simple Imprisonment. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) SANTOSH was married to appellant Amar Singh on May 5, 1992 and was found murdered only after 10 months of her marriage i. e. on March 8, 1993 in her Sasural i. e. the house of the appellants. A written report was lodged on March 8 itself by Ganga Sahay Saini with the Police Station Shivaji Park Alwar to the effect that his nephew's wife in the process of boiling the water got engulfed in flames and died. On the same day another written report was submitted by the father of deceased Babu Lal that her daughter SANTOSH was used to be harassed and humiliated in connection with demand of dowry. Around 11. 00 AM Raju and Ganga Sahay came to him and informed that SANTOSH accidently received electric current and died. He then immediately rushed to the spot and found the body of SANTOSH in chased condition. Police Station Shivaji Park registered a case under Sections 304b and 498a IPC and investigation commenced. After usual investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Alwar. Charges under Sections 147, 304b and 498a IPC were framed against the appellants who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses in support of its case and got exhibited 31 documents. In their explanation under Section 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellants claimed innocence and stated that at the time of incident they were away from their house No witness in defence was however examined. The learned Trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants Amar Singh, Jagdish and Gordhani as indicated herein above.

(3.) RAMAVTAR (PW. 1) in his deposition stated that when he reached to the house of the appellants he saw the dead body of Santosh lying in the room and the doors of the room were opened and crowd was there. Police arrived there after 15-20 minutes. Thereafter Magistrate also reached. Babulal (PW. 2) deposed that the appellant used to demand dowry from Santosh. He further stated that appellant Gordhani was alone in the house and she took him to the room where Santosh was lying dead. He denied this fact that before he reached the house of the appellants, the door of the room got broken. Smt. Chhoti (PW. 4) brother of Santosh stated that as and when Santosh visited his house she used to say that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with demand of dowry. Ganga Sahay (PW. 8) deposed that when he came back after playing Holi around quarter of ten A. M. he found Santosh burnt. He did not inform about this incident to anybody. This witness was declared hostile. He however admitted to have lodged the report and stated that he could neither see boiling water nor did see Santosh falling on the water, he could only see her dead after receiving burns. Dev Karan (PW. 12) who conducted investigation deposed in his cross examination that he did not recollect as to whether the room where the dead body was lying got broken or not. As all necessary proceedings got drawn by ADM, he did not initiate any proceeding or drew site plan. He further deposed that the witnesses told him that Santosh was subjected to cruelty in connection with demand of dowry of scooter by her in- laws. Bhagwan Sahay (PW. 13) deposed that he is next door neighbours of appellant Amar Singh. After playing Holi when he was sitting on the well, he saw smoke spreading out of the room of Amar Singh. He then immediately entered the house of Amar Singh, broke open the door and found Santosh lying on the floor. At that time no family member of Santosh was in the house. Rajendra (PW. 14) stated that Ganga Sahay informed him that Santosh received electric current. He along with Ganga Sahay had then gone to the house of Babulal and informed him accordingly. Kan Singh Rathore (PW. 16) the Additional District Magistrate deposed that he initiated proceedings under Section 174 Cr. P. C. and drew necessary memos. In his cross examination he stated that when he reached at the spot, Babulal and SHO were already there. He also stated that there were fresh signs of broken door near the room in question.