KUMAR UMESH PRASAD @ PUTUL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Prakash Kumar Sahay, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioners and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned APP for the State.

(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 19.06.2008 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2008, whereby and whereunder, the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 18.12007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in G.R. Case No. 471 of 1998 (T.R. No. 124 of 2007), convicting the petitioners for the offences punishable u/s 498A of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) and sentencing them to R.I. for 02 years and a fine of Rs. 500, has been affirmed.

(3.) The prosecution story arises out of a complaint petition initially instituted by the victim wherein it has been stated that she was married with the petitioner No. 1 on 29.04.1996. It has been alleged that after a few days of marriage there was a friction on account of not giving colour television, Godrej Almira and a Fridge and dissatisfaction was also expressed about the quality of articles which were given as gift during her marriage. It has been alleged that when the father of the informant came for her Vidai, it was said that until their demands were not fulfilled, she would not be allowed to go with her father. Subsequently she was assaulted and ousted from her matrimonial house. The complaint case which was initially lodged was sent to the police, which ultimately led to institution of Dhanbad P.S. Case No. 94 of 1998, in which investigation was conducted which resulted in submission of charge-sheet and after cognizance was taken, charge was framed against the accused persons u/s 498A I.P.C. and u/s 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act to which the petitioners pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.