NEMI CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed by Nemi Chand and his mother RAm Pyari against the judgment and order dated 27. 11. 1993 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur whereby the appellant Nemi Chand has been convicted to undergo life imprisonment under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short as "IPC") with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment to further undergo 6 months 'rigorous imprisonment and also to undergo 3 year' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment to further undergo 6 months' rigorous imprisonment under Sec. 498a of the IPC. Smt. Ram Pyari has also been convicted under Sec. 498-A IPC to undergo 3 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 6 months' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE facts as per the prosecution case are that on 14. 7. 90, Ghanshyam had lodged a report as Ex. P. 6 stating therein that his sister was married to appellant Nemi Chand son of Sh. Jagdish on 27. 6. 89 in accordance with the Hindu Rites. After sometime of the marriage, his sister used to be harrassed by her mother-in- law and her husband Nemi Chand on the ground that she had brought very less dowry and they had started giving troubles to her. Her sister had informed them against the behaviour of her inlaws through her letters and also on her visit to village Jetaran Nemi Chand also used to give threats by writing letters to the fact that he can do anything and the consequence will be bad and that the parents of Mst. Seni Devi will have to bear the consequences. THE mother-in-law also used to give threat that Nemi Chand is her son and she could get doen anything from him. It was further alleged in the FIR that on 3/7/1990, Nemi Chand, appellant had come to village Jetarn, accompanied by some of his relatives and he had some discussions. He had also given a threat that the complaint should go to the village Hariyadhana alongwith him and should talk to his mother, otherwise the result will be very had. On the next day i. e. on 4/7/1990, at about 1. 30 A. M. in the morning hours, father in laws of his sister accompanied by Magji Nai of village Ranshi had come to his house on jeep and told that Mst. Seni Devi had threatened that she would commit suicide by jumping in the well. After being told so, he was alarmed in view of the previous attitude of the family of her-inlaws i. e. mother-in-law, brother-in-law (Devar) and husband. His brother Sampat and a neighbour Govind Das went alongwith them in the samp jeep and found his sister Mst. Seni Devi lying dead at their residence. THEy started weeping, as they were least expecting that Nami Chand, the mother-in-law of the sister, the sister-in-law Santosh, and brother-in-law Manohar would do such a henious crime as to kill Seni Devi.

(3.) THE trial Court had proceeded against three accused persons. Out of these three accused persons, two accused persons Manohar, brother and Ram Pyari, mother of the accused No. 3 i. e. appellant were acquitted of the charge of Sec. 302 IPC. THE main allegation of, so called, previous alleged beating and harassment to the deceased was mainly attributed to Manohar, accused who had been acquitted by the Trial Court of the charges under Secs. 302 and 498-A IPC. THE Mother-in-law has already been acquitted of the charge under Sec. 302 IPC, but has been convicted under Sec. 498- A IPC. All the accused had been acquitted of the charge of Sec. 394-B IPC. All three persons were being charged under Sec. 302 IPC, who were amongst the occupants of the house and nothing has been attributed to any single accused for committing the murder, acquitting of the two accused out of three and convicting the appellant only, the question arises whether on the evidence produced or the circumstances narrated by the prosecution, is it possible to uphold the conviction under Sec. 302 IPC in regard to the appellant? THE main prosuection witnesses relied upon by the prosecution and the Trial Court are Ghanshyam, complainant (PW 2), brother of the deceased, Bhawri (PW 13), mother of the deceased, Amba Lal (PW 14), father of the deceased and PW 15 Trishla and PW 17 Sawar Lal Joshi. THE documents relied upon by the Trial Court are the letters Ex. P. 8 and Ex. P. 9, said to have been written by the deceased and some other letters produced in defence.