Raghuvendra S. Rathore, J. - (1.) THE accused appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dt. 22.11.2006 passed by the Special Judge, Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases, Jaipur City, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court as under: - "Appellants No. 1 to 3, namely Smt. Bidami Devi, Vishnukumar and Chhaganlal: - For the offence under Section 498 -A I.P.C. to 3 years R.I. Each with fine of Rs. 100/ - each and in default of payment of fine, three months additional R.I. Each. For the offence under Section 304 -B I.P.C. to L.I. Each with fine of Rs. 100/ - each and in default of payment of fine, three months additional R.I. Each. Appellant No. 4, Kumari Maya: - For the offence under Section 498 -A I.P.C. to 3 years R.I. with fine of Rs. 100/ - and in default of payment of fine, three months additional R.I. For the offence under Section 304 -B I.P.C. to 7 years R.I. with fine of Rs. 100/ - and in default of payment of fine, three months additional R.I." The instant case arises out of a report lodged by Mahaveer Prasad Soni on 27.04.2003 at Police Station Shahpura. It was mentioned in the report that the daughter of the informant, namely Lali (Anita) was married on 15.11.2002 with Vishnu son of Chhagan Lal Soni. Two days earlier i.e. 13.11.2002, the Teeka ceremony had taken place. It is also mentioned in the report that it was at the time of Teeka ceremony that because of the demand made by Chhagan Lal, his sons Vishnu and Dinesh, daughter Maya and his wife Smt. Bidami Devi that the complainant had given Rs. 31,000/ - instead of Rs. 11,000/ -. Likewise, a motorcycle was given in place of a scooter. It is stated that the informant had spent about 5 to 6 lacs rupees which was beyond his capacity but was compelled to do so on account of demand raised by the accused. It is alleged in the report that after the marriage, mother -in -law, father -in -law, husband, devar (brother -in -law) and sister -in -law started demanding money. The deceased Lali (Anita) had told her parents about the demand raised by the aforesaid members of in -laws family and the beating given by the husband. It is also alleged that the deceased was not even given complete food and all the time, she was asked to bring money from her father. The parents of the deceased had always tried to pursue the deceased not to worry as things would become normal after some time. The parents of the deceased had always been paying some amount and gave some articles as and when the deceased Lali had come to their house. It was on the occasion of Gangaur that Anita had come to her parental home and she refused to go back to her in -laws place because of increasing atrocities by them. It is also stated that on this occasion, the in -laws had threatened the deceased that in case, she would not bring money, then she is not to remain alive. Thereafter, the complainant had talked to Chhagan Lal and his wife for requesting them not to harass his daughter and he would be soon making arrangement to pay the amount. It was on the assurance given by the in -laws that the parents had sent the deceased to their residence, but the accused persons had murdered the daughter of informant on 26.04.2003, by strangulation and burn injury. As soon as the complainant received the information in this regard on 27.04.2003, he came to Amarsar alongwith his co -villagers and found the dead body of his daughter lying in the chowk of the house, with a cloth on her mouth. On the aforesaid report, the police registered the first information report (208/2003) for the offences under Section 498 -A and 304 -B I.P.C. and the investigation commenced. Thereafter, the police got the postmortem of the deceased conducted wherein the medical jurist had opined that the cause of death was asphyxia by burn. During the course of investigation, the accused appellants were arrested, Naksha Mauka was prepared, statement of the witnesses were recorded, etc. On conclusion of the investigation, the police filed challan against the accused appellants for the offence under Section 498 -A and 304 -B I.P.C. However, challan was not filed against Dinesh, devar of the deceased. The charge sheet was filed against Kumari Sonu in the Juvenile Court.
(2.) THE trial commenced with framing of charge against the accused persons for the offences under Section 498 -A and 304 -B I.P.C. However, the accused appellants denied the charges and claimed for trial. The prosecution had, in support of their case, produced 26 witnesses and filed 45 documents which were duly exhibited by the learned trial Court. Thereafter, the statement of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused appellants had also submitted their written statements under Section 233(2) Cr.P.C. The accused persons had produced 6 witnesses in their defence and 28 documents which were got exhibited. The learned trial Court, after completion of trial and hearing both the parties, passed the impugned judgment on 22.11.2006 by which it convicted and sentenced the accused persons, as aforementioned. The learned counsel for the accused appellants had assailed the judgment passed by the learned trial Court and submitted that the same deserves to be quashed and set aside as the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. He had also submitted that the learned trial Court had erred in not taking into consideration the fact that the evidence produced by the prosecution is vague and not specific. Further, he has submitted that the learned trial Court has rather convicted the accused appellants on the basis of presumption, than the material on record with regard to the facts of the case. He has also submitted that so far as the accused Maya is concerned, the prosecution has failed to make out any case against her. She has been falsely implicated, without there being any evidence against her. Her name has rather been taken alongwith the other accused without there being any specific overt acts with regard to commission of crime. The learned counsel for the accused appellants has also submitted that the accused Chhagan Lal and Bidami Devi have been roped in only because they are the father -in -law and mother -in -law respectively. According to him, a perusal of the evidence on record goes to show that the allegation against both of them are also wholly vague. The learned counsel for the accused appellants has also submitted that the learned trial Court has erred in not appreciating the evidence produced before it, as for instance, the specific stand taken by the accused Vishnu and the evidence produced in regard to the fact that at the relevant time, he was doing the course of Male Nurse Part -III at Jodhpur. He had in fact left for Jodhpur in the evening of 26.04.2003. Specific questions in this regard were also put to the prosecution witnesses, including the complainant. The daily diary of the deceased were also produced before the Court and a perusal of the same did not reveal any such thing that there was any demand of dowry, harassment or humiliation to her by the husband or the members of the in -laws family. In fact, not a single instance in this regard was made by the deceased in her daily diary. On the contrary, the relation between the deceased wife and the husband were cordial. Soon after the marriage, they had gone for honeymoon tour and later on greetings were exchanged by sending cards to each other on special occasions. The very fact that the investigation agency had filed a final report against Dinesh and no cognizance was taken against him by the learned Magistrate nor any application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. had ever been filed, goes to show that the complainant party had tried to build up the case with false implications. In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court suffers from lack of legal evidence and as such, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) THE learned Public Prosecutor has supported the finding given as well as the judgment passed by the learned trial Court and submitted that the same is based on evidence produced during the trial. Further, he has submitted that the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt. It has been submitted that on consideration of evidence on record, it is clearly revealed that the deceased was constantly harassed by the husband and his family members, since the time the Teeka ceremony had taken place. It has also come on record that the complainant party had tried, many a times, to pursue and pacify the members of the in -laws family and it was on their assurance that the deceased was last sent on the occasion of Gangaur. The allegation against the accused persons are fully corroborated by the statements of the prosecution witnesses. There is nothing on record to show that the prosecution witnesses were telling a lie or that their version is not worthy of reliance. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the facts and circumstances, which has come on record by the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, do establish that the deceased was being harassed, demand of dowry was being made from her and medical evidence on record further corroborates the prosecution case that the deceased had died an unnatural death. Therefore, the impugned judgment do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and be affirmed by this Court.;