Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 617 (RAJ)

State of Rajasthan v. Indra Kumar S/o Banwarilal

2002-03-20

O.P.BISHNOI

body2002
JUDGMENT 1. - This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment of acquittal delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar on 7.6.2001. 2. On 4.5.2000 Sahab Ram S/o Shri Shankar Lal, Resident of - Village Karanpur lodged a report at Police Station - Bhadra, according to which Smt. Birma W/o the accused-Indra Kumar and daughter-in-law of accused-Banwari was found hanging from a tree in an agricultural field. A matter No. 6/2000 under section. 174 was registered and enquiry started. However, the concerned S.H.O. did not deem it proper to reach the site on 4.5.2000. Next day on 5.5.2000 the body hanging from the tree was taken off and the "Panchnama" was prepared. At the request of the S.D.M., Nohar, who was conducting the enquiry under sections. 174 of the Criminal Penal Code, the post-mortem was conducted by Dr. Lalita Swami and Dr. Ram Lal Beniwal (PW-1) on 5.5.2000. No injuries of any nature were found on the dead body and the doctors opined that the cause of death was asphyxia due to hanging. The body was handed-over to the father of the deceased for burial. The father on 5.5.2000 at 10.00 p.m. lodged the report Ex.P/2 at the police station Bhadra with the allegation that the marriage was barely two years old and the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law were insisting for two she-buffalo in dowry. One she-buffalo was delivered but the same was returned and insistence was to the effect that two buffaloes must be given. According to the report, the third accused-Badri Prasad was hand-in-glove with the other two accused persons and at his assurance the girl was sent from her maternal house to in-laws'. Where after one month her body was found hanging from the tree. A case under section 490-A and 304-B r/w Section 34 of the IPC was registered and the challan was filed. The three accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges framed under sections. 498-A and 304-B of the IPC. Eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution and none was examined in defence. The respondents were acquitted on 7.6.2001. 3. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and I find no merit in this petition. The three accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges framed under sections. 498-A and 304-B of the IPC. Eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution and none was examined in defence. The respondents were acquitted on 7.6.2001. 3. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and I find no merit in this petition. The information according to the FIR was received on 5.5.2000 at 9.00 a.m. The maternal side immediately went to the place of occurrence and the body which was hanging was taken off in their presence. However, till 10.00 p.m. no complaint was made. The FIR Ex.P/2 appears to be antedated because the formal FIR Ex.P/14 reached the Magistrate on 8.5.2000. 4. It is not disclosed as to how Badri is related to the husband of the deceased. Without any relationship he cannot be charged for the offences for which he has been charged. PW-2 Hanuman does not say that Badri was in any way related to the husband of the deceased. He has deposed in most irresponsible manner. He has stated as if he was eyewitness of the incident. He has deposed that Smt. Krishna, Badri Prasad, Banwari and Indira jointly hanged Smt. Birma. 5. As per the FIR the demand was in respect of two she- buffaloes. However, Hanuman Ram has admitted that only one buffalo was demanded.. According to the Hanuman Ram he purchased the buffalo for Rs. 10,000/- from PW-7. Bhagwana Ram, who is an uncle of the deceased. Bhagwana Ram does not say that any buffalo was purchased from him for delivery to the accused persons. The learned lower Court has found material contradictions in the testimony of the witnesses. They have contradicted their earlier statements recorded under section.161 of the Criminal Procedure Code 6. Apart from the father, mother two brothers and uncle there is no independent corroboration. PW-8 Prabhu Ram a brother could not support the prosecution case in its entirety and had to be declared hostile. After this in answer to leading questions, he was willing to answer to the suggestions in the affirmative. 7. There is no evidence to suggest that soon before her death the deceased was treated with cruelty in connection with any demand. 8. After this in answer to leading questions, he was willing to answer to the suggestions in the affirmative. 7. There is no evidence to suggest that soon before her death the deceased was treated with cruelty in connection with any demand. 8. She was living in village Karanpur for the last about 2 years and there is not a single person from this village to suggest that she was subjected to any cruelty or misbehaviour. 9. I find no merit in this petition for leave to appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.Petition for leave to appeal dismissed. *******