STATE OF RAJ Vs. VINOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-State (for short, 'the State') has preferred this appeal against the judgment dtd. 26/4/2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Ajmer (for brevity, "the learned trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 41/1999 whereby, the accused-respondents were acquitted of the charges framed against them under Ss. 302, 498-A, 201 IPC and in alternative, under Ss. 302, 201, 498-A read with Sec. 34 IPC.

(2.) The relevant facts in brief are that on a written report furnished by Additional District Magistrate City, Ajmer, after an enquiry conducted under Sec. 176 Cr.P.C., an FIR No. 72 dtd. 18/6/1998 came to be registered at Mahila Thana Ajmer, District-Ajmer for the offence under Ss. 304-B and 498-A IPC stating therein that deceased-Sunita was married to respondent No.1- Vinod Kumar on 2/2/1998 at Agra whereafter, she was residing with her in-laws at Joshganj Ajmer. It was averred that she expired on 29/4/1998 and as per the members of her in-laws family, it was so on account of her sickness. It was alleged that her body was being taken to the cremation ground surreptitiously for last rites whereupon, it was intercepted and upon postmortem of her body, it transpired that there were injury marks on it. After investigation, the respondents were charge-sheeted. Charges were framed against them and they have been acquitted of the same vide judgment impugned dtd. 26/4/2001, as stated hereinabove.

(3.) As per the order of this Court dtd. 13/8/2025, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 namely Chhotelal and Smt. Prem have expired during pendency of the appeal and it stood abated qua them. In view thereof, this appeal survives only against the respondent No. 1-Vinod who shall be referred, hereinafter, as the respondent.