SMT. CHANDRAKALA W/O SHRI NANDLAL D/O SH. BADRI SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER
LAWS(RAJ)-2017-5-162
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on May 15,2017

Smt. Chandrakala W/O Shri Nandlal D/O Sh. Badri Singh Appellant
VERSUS
State of Rajasthan and Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

P.K.LOHRA,J. - (1.) Petitioner-complainant feeling aggrieved by judgment dated 21.11.2014, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge No.2, Bikaner (for short, 'learned appellate Court'), whereby learned appellate Court confirmed the verdict of acquittal dated 04.12.2006, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class) No.2, Bikaner (for short, 'learned trial Court'), has preferred this revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. Initially, the learned trial Court, vide its judgment dated 04.12.2006, acquitted accused-respondent for offence under Sections 498A and 406 I.P.C. giving him benefit of doubt. Subsequently, the learned appellate Court, while concurring with the findings and conclusions of the learned trial Court, affirmed the same.
(2.) In brief, facts of the case are that petitioner-complainant filed a complaint before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bikaner stating therein that she was married with second respondent Nandlal on 20.11.1989 and at the time of marriage sufficient dowry was given by her family. It is alleged that after marriage, accused-respondent was selected in police service as Sub Inspector and thereafter he started subjecting the petitioner to physical and mental cruelty. An allegation for demand of dowry is also made in the complaint. It is also alleged in the complaint that while the accused was posted at Chhatargarh, he was suspended and at that time also he raised a demand of Rs.50,000/-. The accused ultimately turned her out from the house and refused to return dowry articles.
(3.) The learned Magistrate sent the complaint to concerned police station under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the police registering FIR No.294/1994 started investigation. Accused-respondent was prosecuted for offence under Sections 498A and 406 I.P.C. by filing charge-sheet. Learned trial Court framed charge against him for aforesaid offence and on denial, he was put on trial. In order to prove charge against accused-respondent, prosecution examined eleven witnesses and got exhibited thirty-four documents. Subsequently, statement of accused-respondent was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and, in defence, he examined three witnesses and exhibited nineteen documents. Learned trial Court, then, proceeded to hear final arguments and by its verdict dated 04.12.2006 acquitted the accused-respondent extending him benefit of doubt.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.