JITENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Jitendra Kumar And Ors.
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
Click here to view full judgement.
U.C. Dhyani, J. -
(1.) IN the instant case, criminal law was set into motion on the complaint (Ext. Ka -6) dated 02.10.1987 of Somdutt Bharadwaj s/o Roop Chand r/o Mohalla Shekhupura within the jurisdiction of P.S. Kankhal, district Haridwar. Chik FIR (Ext. Ka - 12) was lodged on 02.10.1987 at 4:40 pm at P.S. Kankhal which was registered as case crime no. 108 of 1987 under Sections 498A, 307 IPC. Occurrence took place on 02.10.1987 at 10:30 am. The distance between the place of occurrence and P.S. concerned was 1/2 kilometer and hence there appeared to be no delay in lodging FIR. It was the cousin of deceased who initiated proceedings by filing complaint (Ext. Ka -6). Prosecution story was that victim Hridyesh Kumari d/o Shri Chand Sharma r/o Mohalla Chakteerth Soron, district Eta (UP) was married to appellant Jitendra Kumar s/o Kanti Prasad r/o Mohalla Lalkuan, Kankhal, Haridwar in April 1982. They lived happily for a few days but after that appellant Jitendra Kumar and his mother, appellant Premlata started harassing the victim on account of bringing lesser dowry. Appellants demanded VCR. Victim could not resist harassment and went to her parental home. On the intervention of the relatives, victim came back to her appellant -husband.
(2.) ON 2nd October, 1987 at 10:30 am, appellants (husband and mother -in -law of victim) set her on fire after pouring kerosene oil on her. She cried for help and came out of her house. Witnesses Nathhuram r/o Gauri Shankar, Dayaram s/o Lakshmi Chand and several others came on the spot and extinguished fire. Appellants dragged victim back into the house. In the meantime, informant also reached there. Informant saw his cousin in pathetic condition and she was admitted in G.D. Hospital, Haridwar. There were remote chances of her survival. After investigation of the case, charge -sheet (Ext. Ka - 16) for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302, 201 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act was submitted against accused appellants. Charges for the offences punishable under Sections 498A read with Section 34 IPC, 304B read with Section 34 IPC, 302 IPC, 201 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act were framed against the accused persons by the trial court. As many as 14 witnesses were examined on behalf of prosecution. Statements of the accused -appellants were taken under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Three witnesses were examined on behalf of the accused -appellants. Both the accused Jitendra Kumar and Premlata were convicted by the trial court for the offences punishable under Section 304B IPC on 03.08.2002. They were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 03.08.2002, appellants Jitendra Kumar and Premlata preferred present appeals.
(3.) VICTIM was married to appellant Jitendra Kumar in the year 1982 and the occurrence took place in the year 1982, hence incident took place within 7 years of their marriage. Postmortem report (Ext. Ka -7) suggests that victim died due to shock as a result of ante -mortem burns.
Hence there is no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that victim died under unnatural circumstances.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.