MEENA DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State on the point of bail.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that although the appellants have been convicted under section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code but none of the ingredients necessary for conviction under section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code is fulfilled in the present case. He further submits that the allegations levelled against the appellants are vague and general in nature and all the witnesses, who are alleged to have supported the factum of occurrence and the involvement of the present appellants, are relations of the deceased and are therefore interested witnesses. He also submits that the evidence with respect to demand of dowry is inconsistent. He also submits that the appellant no. 1 is the mother in law of the deceased and is an aged infirm person.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there are specific allegations against both the appellants of demand of dowry and torture. He further submits that even as per the postmortem report, the cause of death was due to asphyxia by hanging and it was the duty on the part of the appellants to explain the death of the deceased.