- (1.) THIS appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 25/ 26-05-2006, passed by learned Ses sions Judge, Pithoragarh in S. T. No. 44 of 2004, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigor ous imprisonment for seven years under section 304-B Indian Panel Code, 1860 (for brevity as I. PC.) and a fine of Rs. 3,000/ -. In default of payment of fine, the appellant shall further undergo six months R. I.
(2.) BRIEF facts for the disposal of this appeal are that an EI. R. was lodged by the complainant Padam Singh in the po lice Station Jhula Ghat on 17-08-2004 at about 6:30 p. m. alleging therein that marriage of his daughter Smt. Kavita and appellant Bahadur Singh was sol emnized on 27-04-2003. On 15-08-2004 at about 1:30 p. m. , an information was given to the parents of the deceased about her illness. On this, his wife Bhaghirathi Devi and other relatives went to the matrimonial house of his daughter and found her dead in suspi cious circumstances. Thereafter, the complainant who was working at Kathgodam was informed on telephone on 16-08-2004 at about 7:00 a. m. about the said incident. Thereafter, he took the leave and reached at the place of incident and found her daughter dead in suspicious circumstances. It was fur ther alleged that the accused/appellant and his relatives were responsible for committing the death of the deceased on account of dowry demand. On the ba sis of written report, a case was regis tered against the accused persons namely Bahadur Singh, Gopal Singh and Basanti Devi. Thereafter, the police also conducted the post mortem on the dead body of the deceased and after completing the investigation, the Inves tigating Officer submitted the chargesheet Ex. Ka. 12 before the court concerned. The accused persons were com mitted to the Court of Sessions and the trial court framed charge u/s 304-B I. P. C. against the accused persons. The ac cused persons denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined Dr. Satish Kumar PW1 who conducted the post mortem on the body of the deceased. Bhaghirathi Devi PW2 is the mother of the deceased. The informant Padam Singh PW3 is the fa ther of the deceased. Harish Singh PW4 is the cousin of the informant. Bhaghirathi Devi PW2, Padam Singh PW3 and Harish Lal PW4 have stated in their evidence that marriage took place on 27-04-2003 and whenever the deceased used to come to her parental house, she used to complain about the dowry and harassment meted to her by her in-laws. Constable Balkishan PW5 is the formal witness. Shri B. R. Arya PW6 is the Investigating Officer of the case.
(3.) AFTER recording the entire evi dence, the accused persons were exam ined u/s 313 Cr. P. C. and they denied the entire evidence and pleaded not guilty to the offence. The accused have stated that on 15- 08-2004, the deceased went to ease herself out about a distance of 20-25 meter in sloppy area and while she was returning she fell down on the ground. Thereafter she complained pain on her body. The doctor was called but by that time the deceased had died. The accused further denied the demand of dowry and harassment of the deceased by him, The accused persons examined village Pradhan Harish Singh DW1 in support of his defence.;