RATHORE, J. - (1.) THIS criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) has been filed by the accused-appellants against the judgment dated 24. 11. 1984, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bharatpur by which he convicted the accused-appellants for the offence under Section 306 I. P. C. and sentenced for three years' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of which to further undergo six months' imprisonment.
(2.) INSTANT case was initiated against the accused-appellants and two others namely Manhori S/o Hukam Chand and Smt. Triveni. The accused Ramesh Chand is the husband, Manhori and Triveni are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, respectively. The prosecution case is that since the time of marriage, the deceased Santo was being harrased, beaten and humiliated on account of dowry. As a result, the deceased being fed-up of the members of the in-laws family, committed suicide. It was on 5. 7. 83, in the morning hours, that a female deadbody having been cut into pieces, was found on the railway track, near the outer signal of the railway station, Roopwa, District Bharatpur. One Shiv Kumar, a neighbour of the accused, is said to have first seen the deadbody and a doubt arose in his mind that the deadbody was of the wife of Ramesh Chand. Thereafter, a report (Ex-P/2) was filed at Police Station, Roopwas. As the matter did not appear to be clear from the report, initially proceeding under Section 174 Cr. P. C. was taken up and Ramchandra, SHO, went to the place of incident. The 'panchnama' of the deadbody was prepared and after the conduct of postmortem, it was found to be a case of suicide. Consequently, a regular report (92/83) came to be registered for the offence under Section 306 I. P. C. On the conclusion of the investigation, challan came to be filed in the Court of ACJM, Bayana under Section 306 I. P. C. The case being triable by Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the same before the Court of Sessions, Bharatpur. The learned trial Court, after hearing the parties, framed charges under Section 306 I. P. C. vide its order dated 11. 6. 84. The accused persons denied the charges and claimed for trial. In support of its case, the prosecution produced 11 witnesses and some documents which were duly exhibited. Thereafter, the statements of the accused persons, under Section 313 Cr. P. C. , were recorded. The accused Manhori stated that all the prosecution witnesses were telling a lie. The marriage had taken place about two months ago and he denied the expenditure of marriage to be of Rs. 27,000/ -. He also denied that Dinesh had come to his house. According to the accused, they had enmity with Shiv Kumar. The co-accused Triveni also stated that the statements of the prosecution witnesses were false and Dinesh had not come to her house. She also denied any differences with deceased Santo. The accused Ramesh Chand had stated that the marriage took place about two months earlier to the incident and denied that the expenditure of Rs. 27,000/- had been made in the marriage. According to him, the deceased Santo was educated up to 11th class, whereas he had failed in 8th class. He had also stated that his marriage with Santo was a second marriage because his earlier wife had died. He had specifically stated that deceased Santo use to say that she was unfortunate because she had been made to marry a person who had not passed 8th class and had married for the second time. Therefore, the deceased said that it would be better if she dies. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Court acquitted Manhori S/o Hukam Chand, the fatherin- law of the deceased but convicted and sentenced the accused Ramesh Chand and Triveni, for the aforesaid offences.
(3.) THE prime witnesses of the prosecution were Nemichand (PW-1) father of the deceased and Smt. Angoori (PW-2) mother of the deceased. Dinesh (PW-4) was the cousin brother of the deceased. Vagaliram (PW-2) is a railway employee. Dr. Hari Prasad Gupta (PW-5) is the Medical Jurist, who conducted the postmortem report. Shiv Kumar (PW-6), Amarjeet (PW- 7) and Chhiddi Lal (PW- 8) are the independent witnesses, who are the neighbours of the accused persons. Javitri (PW-9) and Saumoti (PW-10) were the residents of village Roopwas but both of them have not supported the prosecution story and as such they had to be declared hostile. The learned counsel for the accused-appellants, at the very outset, submitted that the accused Smt. Triveni has already expired on 15. 1. 2006. As regards, the accused Ramesh Chand, the learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is no evidence whatsoever against him. He has further submitted that the independent witnesses namely Shiv Kumar, Amarjeet and Chhiddi Lal have not given any evidence against the accused Ramesh and as such the learned Court below has grossly erred in passing the impugned judgment against him. The learned Public Prosecutor has supported the impugned judgment and submitted that the prosecution has fully proved its case against accused persons. According to him, the accused persons had harassed, beaten and humiliated the deceased, who was married only two months ago. Consequently, the deceased was compelled to commit suicide and as such the accused persons had committed the offence under Section 306 I. P. C. It has been rightly held so by the learned trial Court and accordingly punished. ;