FODAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated May 29, 1993 of Additional Sessions Judge Hindaun City, whereby the appellant, Fodan Singh has been convicted and sentenced as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_79_LAWS(RAJ)11_19951.html</FRM> The substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Deceased Smt. Asso was married to the appellant about 7-8 years prior to her death. She died on or about Sept. 4, 1989 at her inlaws house in village Tantali. The report of the incident was made by RW. 3, Moni Singh, the father of the deceased on 11.9.89 i.e. after 7 days of the death. The report is Ex.R 8 on the record. It was stated in the report that at the time of the marriage of his daughter Smt. Asso, he had given presentation as per his capacity, but the mother-in-law and the father-in-law of her daughter were not happy and they were demanding more silver and gold. It was also stated that his daughter Smt. Asso used to make complaints through others that her mother-in-law, father-in-law, Jeth and other family members were harassing her for dowry and she was also being taunted for not giving birth to a child. It was also stated in the report that the father-in-law, mother-in- law, Jeth and other family members of her daughter committed murder after conspiring and her dead body was cremated in the night itself. It may be stated here that the report is a typed one. On this report, the S.H.O. Police Station, Todabhim, registered Crime No. 224/89 under section 304-B IPC. After completion of the investigation a charge sheet was filed against six persons, namely, the appellant, Fodan Singh, Sawai Singh, Smt. Maya Devi, Hanuman Singh, Janak Singh and Kishan Singh for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304-B, 498-A, 201 and 120-B I.RC. However, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge vide his order dated, 26.2.92 discharged all the accused persons except the appellant. Charges under Sections 302, 201 and 498-A I.P.C. were framed against the appellant.

(3.) During the course of trial, prosecution examination 14 witnesses. No witness was examined in defence. The learned trial Court placing reliance on the prosecution evidence convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated earlier.