MOHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated June 15, 2004 of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindauncity Distt. Karauli whereby the accused appellants were convicted under Sections 498A and 304 B IPC to suffer 2 years RI with fine of Rs. 2000/- each in default to suffer three months RI and 10 years RI. Sentence of accused appellant Bisso Devi was suspended by the order of this Court dated August 2, 2005 and since then she is on bail. Sentence of accused appellant Mohar Singh, who was aged about 75 years, was suspended by the order of this Court dated October 11, 2006 and since then he is on bail. Accused appellant Amrit Lal is in judicial custody and he has remained in judicial custody for more than 6 years and 3 months and 2 days as of today.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged by deceased's father Shriman on December 29, 2002 at Police Station Shrimahavirji. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR the police registered case for the offences under Sections 147, 498A and 304 B IPC. In the FIR it was stated that Mayadevi was married to accused appellant Amrit Lal on May 5, 1996. The informant stated that after marriage whenever Mayadevi reached to his village she complained that the persons in the in-laws family used to beat her for not bringing sufficient dowry. The informant stated that any how he sent his daughter to in-laws house. He reported this matter to Panchayat of the village also. Panchas of the Village Panchayat satisfied him that the accused appellants will not repeat their acts in future. But in the morning at about 8.00 he received a telephonic message on December 29, 2002 that daughter Mayadevi was killed by her inlaws and they are going for cremation. He immediately made telephonic call to Police Station and upon this the police registered the case as mentioned above. After investigation the police filed challan before the Court of Judicial Magistrate Shrimahaveerji and the same was committed to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Hindauncity and which was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindauncity. The trial Court framed charges under Sections 498A and 304 B IPC against the accused appellants to which they denied and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined 10 witnesses and exhibited 24 documents. The statements of accused appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded and no witness in defence was produced. After hearing both sides the trial Court by the aforesaid judgment dated June 15, 2004, convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as mentioned above. Against the said order, this appeal was preferred by the appellants.

(3.) Mr. U.P. Gaur and Mr. Mahendra Sandilya drawn attention of this Court on the case reported in Khem Chand @ Pappu and another vs. State of Rajasthan (2005 (2) WLC Raj. 290, wherein this Court held as under: