AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This criminal appeal has been preferred on behalf of the
appellant being aggrieved with the judgment dated 15.1.2015
passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sujangarh (for short ''the trial
court'') in Sessions Case No.06/2008, whereby the trial court has
acquitted the accused respondents for the offences punishable
under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC.
Brief facts of the case are that the sister of the appellant
namely Madina was married to accused respondent No.3 - Imran
on 28.1.2004 and thereafter she was residing with Imran and his
family at Sujangarh. In the intervening night of 20.6.2006 and
21.6.2006, Madina died in the hospital at Sujangarh.
As per the prosecution story, accused respondent Imran
immediately informed the appellant and his family members about
the death of Madina and the mother, father, brother and other
relatives of Madina reached at Sujangarh in the early morning on
21.6.2006. The father of accused respondent Imran has submitted
a written report to the SHO, Police Station, Sujangarh on
21.6.2006 informing about the un-natural death of Madina.
Thereafter, a ''murg'' was registered at the Police Station,
Sujangarh and inquiry was initiated by the SDM under Section 174
Cr.P.C. The post mortem of deceased Madina was conducted in the
presence of the appellant and his father and their statements have
also been recorded by the SDM on the very same day. In those
statements, the appellant and his father had stated that Madina
died due to some ailment and they have not expressed any doubt
about her death.
Later on, on 10.7.2006, a complaint was filed by the
appellant before the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Sujangarh alleging
that the accused respondents were constantly harassing his sister
Madina for bringing less dowry and they had murdered her by
administering poison.
Pursuant to the complaint filed by the appellant, an FIR
No.108/2006 was registered at the Police Station, Sujangarh for
the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 406 IPC
and the investigation was carried out. After investigation, the
police has filed charge-sheet against the accused respondents for
the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC and
the trial court has framed charges against the accused
respondents for the aforesaid offences.
The accused respondents had denied the charges levelled
against them and claimed trial. During the course of trial, the
prosecution has produced as many as 15 witnesses and also got
certain documents exhibited. The statements of the accused
respondents were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
The trial court after going through the prosecution evidence
and the material available on record has acquitted the accused
respondents for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and
304-B IPC vide impugned judgment. Hence, this criminal appeal.
The learned trial court has considered the prosecution
evidence in detail and held that though the appellant, his mother,
father and the neighbours at Jaipur had alleged that the accused
respondents were constantly harassing Madina for bringing less
dowry but at the same time, they have also specifically admitted
in their cross-examination that at the time of marriage, no such
demand of dowry was ever made by the accused respondents and
whatever they have given to their daughter in the marriage was
voluntarily acted. The trial court has further observed that the
mother of the deceased namely Nubina (PW-2) in her statement
has also admitted that accused Imran has purchased motorcycle
from his own money. The trial court has therefore disbelieved the
evidence of the prosecution witnesses in respect of the demand of
dowry by the accused respondents.
The trial court has also taken into consideration the fact that
though the prosecution has claimed that Madina was murdered by
administering poison but from the medical and the FSL reports, it
is clear that no poison was found in the viscera collected by the
police.
The trial court has also taken into consideration the fact that
before the death of Madina, she was suffering from second grade
tuberculosis and she was under regular treatment. While relying
on the evidence of Dr.Narendra Pradhan (PW-7), the trial court has
held that from the documentary evidence collected by the police
during the course of investigation, the fact regarding the ailment
of deceased is clearly established.
The trial court has further held that the behaviour of the
appellant and his family members is doubtful from the fact that
when the post mortem and burial of the deceased was conducted
in their presence, they had not raised any doubt about the death
of Madina, however, later on after 20 days, they filed a complaint
against the accused respondents and no explanation regarding the
said delay has been given by them.
Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Public Prosecutor and after perusing the impugned judgment, this
Court is of the opinion that the judgment passed by the trial court
is not liable to be interfered with.
Hence, this criminal appeal being bereft of force is hereby
dismissed.