DEVENDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have assailed the judgment dtd. 14/9/2017, passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Government Appeal No.57 of 2010, whereby the judgment dtd. 17/4/2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Rudraprayag acquitting them from the charges under Sec. 498A, 304B and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") has been reversed and they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven year with a fine of Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees Ten thousand) and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Sec. 304B IPC. The appellants have also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Sec. 120B IPC and two years under Sec. 498A IPC. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction, the appellants are before this Court, in this appeal by way of special leave.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the case are that the appellant No.1, Devender Singh, son of appellant No. 3, Smt. Kunja Devi and Bhawan Singh was married to the deceased, Sushila, the wedding having been solemnized on 20/10/2007. Sushila is stated to have gone missing from her matrimonial home since 24/4/2008. This came to the knowledge of the mother of the deceased when the appellant No.2 herein, Jagdish Singh, brother of the appellant No. 1 called her on 25/4/2008, at 7.00 p.m. to inform her and enquire as to whether Sushila had gone to the parental home. The mother of the deceased in turn informed her son, the complainant, who resided at Haridwar. On returning to his house, the complainant went to the matrimonial home of the deceased on 28/4/2008. It has been alleged by the complainant that keeping in view the fact that there were repeated demands for dowry made by the appellants and the manner in which they had behaved with him when he had gone to visit them, made him suspect that his sister had been killed by the appellants but they were feigning ignorance and acting as if his sister had gone missing.

(3.) Based on the complaint, investigation was carried out by the local police and the body of Sushila was subsequently found in Ganga river. Having regard to the fact that an unnatural death had taken place within about six months of the marriage and since there was an allegation of cruelty relating to demand of dowry, a case was registered against the appellants under Ss. 498A, 304B and 120B of IPC. The appellants having denied the allegations levelled against them, trial was conducted in Sessions Trial No.18/2008 before the District and Sessions Judge, Rudraprayag. In support of their case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses arrayed as PW-1 to PW-14. Besides denying their role while recording their statements under Sec. 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the appellants/accused also examined DW-1 to DW-3 as their witnesses. On considering the evidence, the trial Court recorded findings in favour of the appellants and acquitted all of them vide judgment dtd. 17/4/2010.