RAJU MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the state

(2.) The instant appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 7th February, 2007 passed by Sri C.P. Asthana, 6th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 195 of 2005 by which judgment he found all the appellants guilty Under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and sentenced appellant No. 1 and appellant No. 2 i.e. Raju Mahto & Rooplal Mahto R.I. for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2500/- and in default to undergo R.I. for 6 months. Further appellant No. 3 and appellant No. 4 have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-and on default to undergo S.I. for 3 months.

(3.) It is submitted by learned Counsel for the appellants that the informant, Budhani Devi -P.W.3 is not a legally wedded wife of appellant No. 1, Raju Mahto and as such his conviction and that of his family members is bad in law and fit to be set aside. He has further submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove any demand of dowry or any money was paid, hence the conviction in absence of any such evidence is bad in law and fit to be set aside. It has also been argued by leaned Counsel for the appellants that the charge Under Section 313 of the I.P.C. was made against the appellants that they caused miscarriage and abortion of the victim-informant, but they failed to prove the same and appellants were acquitted from the said charge and on that count also the conviction is bad in law and fit to be set aside.