- (1.) The State is aggrieved by the judgment dated 15.05.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Hanumangarh whereby the learned Judge has acquitted Parmaram, the accused-respondent, for offences under Sections 498A and 304-B IPC.
(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 10.06.2006, Moolchand (P.W.3) had lodged a report at Police Station Hanumangarh Town wherein he had claimed that his younger sister, Savitri Devi, was married to Parmaram four years back. He further alleged that on 09.06.2006 Parmaram had taken his sister to their farm, where a poisonous substance was administered to her.
(3.) Therefore, he prayed that proceedings should be initiated against him. On the basis of this report, proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C., were commenced and a murm FIR was registered. Nineteen days latter, on 29.06.2006, Sugana (P.W.1) filed a complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh, wherein she claimed that her younger daughter, Savitri Devi, was married to Parmaram four years ago. Although, they had given sufficient dowry at the time of marriage, however, Parmaram and his family members were not satisfied with the dowry so given. She further claimed that Parmaram and his family members used to physically, and emotionally torture her daughter. She further alleged that they had demanded Rs.10,000/- in cash by way of dowry.;