During the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, the parents A 2 and A 3 of the appellant expired and the appeal against them stood abated.
The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as under On 26.01.1989, Mustafa Shahadal Shaikh A1 the appellant accused married one Hasina Mustafa Shaikh since deceased at Tembalalwadi, Dist.
891 of 1990 whereby the High Court companyfirmed the order of companyviction and sentence dated 07.12.1990 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge at Kolhapur against the appellant herein.
During the trial, prosecution examined 12 witnesses and marked several documents.
7 of 1990 and A 1 Husband, A 2 Father, A 3 Mother, A 4 sister in law were arrayed as accused number.
186/89 Exh.20 was registered against the appellant and his family members for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 304 B and 498 A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC .
Heard Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, learned companynsel for the appellant accused and Mr. Sachin J. Patil, learned companynsel for the respondent State.
the death occurred on 23.08.1989 i.e. within a period of 7 months from the date of marriage i.e. 26.01.1989.
The evidence of PW 6 the father of the deceased also proves the torture and harassment for the settlement for the payment of money and, in fact, this was narrated on 18.08.1989 i.e. just 5 days prior to the date of her death.
The appellant and his parents informed about her death to her family members.
She was taken to CPR Hospital at Kolhapur where the doctor declared that she was brought dead.
The case was companymitted to the Court of Sessions and numbered as Sessions Case No.
Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant has preferred this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
Being aggrieved, the appellant and his parents preferred Criminal Appeal No.
Kolhapur, Maharashtra.
Kolhapur, Maharashtra.
By order dated 07.12.1990, the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, while acquitting the sister A 4 of the appellant herein, companyvicted the appellant and his parents for the offence punishable under Sections 498 A and 304 B read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced them to suffer RI for 1 year along with a fine of Rs.1,000/ , in default, to further under RI for 6 months and RI for 7 years respectively.
1 to 4.
By the impugned judgment dated 28.11.2007, the High Court dismissed the appeal while companyfirming the companyviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court against the appellant.
However, he did number listen to him and left his house.
After marriage, Hasina was staying with the appellant in her matrimonial home at Ujalawadi Taluka Karveer, Dist.
On 23.08.1989, when she was at her matrimonial home, she companymitted suicide by companysuming poison.
On the same day, Abdul Rahim Shaikh PW 4 the grand father of the deceased lodged an F.I.R. at Karveer Police Station, Kohlapur alleging torture and harassment faced by the deceased on account of demand for dowry.
In support of the above charges, the prosecution heavily relied on the companyplaint Exh.
Discussion The only point for companysideration in this appeal is whether the prosecution has made out a case in respect of the charges leveled against the appellant relating to Section 304B and 498A IPC.
20 , the evidence of PWs 4, 6, 7 and 9 and other relevant circumstance, viz.,
Explanation For the purpose of this sub section, dowry shall have the same meaning as in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 28 of 1961 Whoever companymits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall number be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment of life The above provision was inserted by Act 43 of 1986 and came into force w.e.f.
Sathasivam,J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.11.2007 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.
