PREMA DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
State of Uttarakhand and others
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The complainant Smt. Prema Devi gave an
application to the police station Maneri, which was based
upon the telephonic communication given by her son-in-law
on 14.08.2006, at 5:00 p.m., that her daughter Sarita, who
had gone to forest to fetch grass, did not return by the
evening. Smt. Prema Devi got perturbed. She went to
matrimonial home of Sarita. She suspected the behaviour
and conduct of Sarita's in-laws. According to her, Sarita
was married to Suresh in November, 2002, but the members
of her matrimonial home started harassing her for want of
bringing sufficient dowry. She suspected that her in-laws
killed Sarita and caused disappearance of her dead body.
The report was lodged on 15.08.2006, at 6.05 p.m. After the
investigation, a charge-sheet for the offences punishable
under Sections 498-A and Section of the Dowry
Prohibition Act was submitted against the accused pesons.
Accused were summoned to face the trial. Charges for the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A IPC and Section
of the Dowry Prohibition Act were framed against them,
to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(2.) PW 1 Smt. Prema Devi, Pw 2 Smt. Anita Bhatt,
PW 3 Smt. Pushpa Bhatt, PW 4 Smt. Roopa Devi, PW 5
Smt. Laita Devi, PW 6 Bihari Lal, PW 7 Ramananad Bhatt,
PW 8 Surendra Dutt, PW 9 Poornanand, PW 10 HC Madan
Mohan and PW 11 Munna Singh Chauhan (investigating
officer) were examined on behalf of the prosecution.
Incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons
under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which they said that they
were falsely implicated in the criminal case. No evidence
was given in defence. After considering the evidence on
record, learned CJM, Uttarkashi, exonerated Indrajeet, Smt.
Sulochana and Km. Suman of the charges levelled against
them, vide impugned judgment and order dated 1st August,
2007. Feeling aggrieved against the order of acquittal,
present Criminal Revision was preferred by the complainant
Smt. Prema Devi.
(3.) PW 1 Smt. Prema Devi was the informant, who
proved her report (Ext. Ka-1) and said that she received
information through telephone that her daughter, who had
gone to fetch the grass, did not return. PW 1 got perturbed
on receiving the telephonic message from her son-in-law.
She said that the members of her matrimonial home were
used to assault her daughter for want of bringing sufficient
dowry. She levelled allegations against father-in-law,
mother-in-law and sister-in-law of her daughter. In the
cross-examination, PW 1 admitted that nobody saw
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.