R.M. Chauhan, J. - (1.) PRESENT: Sri Pankaj Kumar Tyagi, the learned counsel for the appellants. The learned AGA for the State.
(2.) THE appellants Lalit Kumar Sharma and his father Jagdeesh Sharma alias Jagveer Sharma, both residents of 216/2C Shatabdi Nagar, RS. Partappur, district Meerut have filed this appeal under Section 351 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the 'Code') against the judgment and order dated 16.12.2008 passed by Sri Yogendra Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Ghaziabad in Criminal Misc. Case No. 16 of 2008, State v. Lalit Sharma and another under Section 344, Cr.P.C., PS. Modinagar, district Ghaziabad, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge has held the accused appellants guilty under Section 344, Cr.P.C. for giving false evidence in ST. No. 727 of 2006, State v. Pradeep alias Teetu and others, under Section 366, I.P.C., P.S. Modinagar, district Ghaziabad. Consequently, he has convicted and sentenced the appellant No. 1 Lalit Kumar Sharma to undergo RI for two months and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. He has convicted and sentenced appellant No. 2 Jagdeesh Sharma to undergo RI for one month and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. THE sentence further directs that in case the accused fail to pay the amount of fine each of them will further undergo additional imprisonment for ten days. In this appeal a short legal question is involved for consideration therefore, the appeal is being finally disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. The main question for consideration before the Court is that whether the appellant had wilfully and knowingly had given false evidence in S.T. No. 727 of 2006 as mentioned above.
(3.) THE relevant facts giving rise to the present appeal may be summarised as under: The appellant No. 2, Jagdeesh Sharma alias Jagveer Sharma, son of Harish Chandra Sharma had married his elder daughter Sabita to accused Pradeep Sharma alias Teetu Sharma, resident of Sikari Kalan, P.S. Modinagar, district Ghaziabad. She gave birth to a female child out of her wedlock, but unfortunately, she had died on account of her illness. He thereafter, on the offer of accused Pradeep Sharma married his younger daughter Vishakha alias Juli to him. She gave birth to a male child out of her wedlock, but unfortunately, she also met to her death under mysterious circumstances at the house of accused. When the appellant No. 2 heard about the death of his daughter Juli, he alongwith appellant No. 1 and other family members went to the house of the accused and found Juli lying dead there. The appellant No. 1 Lalit Kumar Sharma thereafter lodged a written report at the police station Modinagar with the allegation that his sister had been done to death by her husband, her brother-in-laws (devar) Sandeep and Manoj and her mother-in-law Mahendri for demand of dowry. On the written report of the appellant No. 2, the Police of P.S. Modinagar registered a case under Sections 306, 498-A, I.P.C. and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the accused. The Investigating Officer after investigation of case submitted charge-sheet against the accused which gave rise to S.T. No. 727 of 2006, State v. Pradeep Kumar alias Teetu and others.;