BANTI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and sentence dtd. 22/1/2016 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases) Bharatpur, in Sessions Case No. 22/2014 whereby appellant-Bunti @ Laxminarayan has been convicted for offence under Sec. 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000.00, in default for non-payment of fine, to further undergo one year simple imprisonment and appellant No. 2-Smt. Ramdulari has been convicted for offence under Sec. 302/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000.00, in default for non-payment of fine, to further undergo one year simple imprisonment.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that a written report was lodged by Bhikkan Singh-maternal uncle of the deceased along with his brother-in-law-Ramkishore at Police Station Nadbai, District Bharatpur on 17/2/2014 about the death of Dheeraj-wife of appellant Bunti. It was mentioned in the FIR that marriage of deceased with appellant-Bunti took place on 18/11/2011. Appellant-Bunti, his brother-Ravi and mother-in-law-Ramdulari used to harass the deceased on account of dowry. There was demand of Rs.50,000.00. The deceased first turned out of the house and she was threatened that if she does not fulfill the demand, she would be burned alive. It was also mentioned in the report that Kerosene was poured upon the deceased and she was put ablaze. The police on the basis of above report, registered FIR No. 102/2014 and after due investigation submitted charge-sheet under Ss. 498-A, 302 in alternative Sec. 304-B of IPC against appellant-Bunti husband of the deceased and Ramdulari- mother-in-law of deceased. The Trial Court framed charges against appellant-Bunti for offence under Sec. 302 and 498-A IPC and in alternative offence under Sec. 304-B of IPC and against appellant-Ramdulari under Sec. 302 read with 34 IPC and Sec. 498-A of IPC. Accused denied charges and sought trial. On behalf of the prosecution as many as 17 witnesses were examined and 30 documents were exhibited. Explanation of the accused was recorded under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. No evidence was produced in defence. After hearing both the parties learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant vide judgment and sentence dtd. 22/1/2016, aggrieved by which the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) It is contended by counsel for the appellants that Bhikkan Singh-complainant(PW.1) has not supported the prosecution version and has been declared hostile. PW.2-brother of the deceased has also not supported the prosecution version and has turned hostile. PW.4-Ramrati aunt of deceased, PW.5-Saroj- mother of deceased, PW.6-Aidel Singh and PW.7-Mahavir neighbour of deceased have turned hostile. It is also contended that learned Trial Court has convicted the appellants solely on the basis of dying declaration(Ex.P-20) recorded by the Magistrate. It is further contended that appellants have been acquitted for offence under Sec. 498-A and 304-B of IPC meaning thereby that the prosecution has failed to establish that there was any demand of dowry.