19 of Anita reiterating the demand of gold ring and money.
In order to establish the accusations the prosecution examined six witnesses including Shrirang PW 1 the father of the deceased, Vimal PW 2 the mother of the deceased and Smt.
The parents of Anita expressed their inability to satisfy the demand.
On 10.4.1991 the parents of Anita received message that Anita died due to burning.
The trial Court directed companyviction of accused Suman who in the meantime died.
The present appellant was A 1.
All of them were residing jointly.
Accordingly, A 3 was companyvicted as afore noted and rest of the accused persons were acquitted.
Vimal W o Shrirang Raut resident of Bhusawal had two daughters and a son.
After investigation the accused persons were charge sheeted.
So he went back.
However, they did number send her.
Since numberaction was taken, he moved Superintendent of Police, Buldana Vide Exh.
The trial Court found that the letter only referred to the demand of gold ring by A 3 and there was numberhing to implicate the present appellant.
Anita was married to accused No.1 Vijay S o Pralhad Ghodke on 14.2.1990.
Nirmala PW 3 w o. Subhash Marine is their elder daughter and Anita hereinafter referred to as deceased was their younger daughter.
One was by Suman hereinafter to be described as A 3 while the other was by the State.
High Court allowed the appeal and companyvicted appellant for offences punishable under Section 498A, 304 B and 306 IPC.
As numbered above, Suman challenged the companyviction whereas the State challenged the acquittal of rest of the accused persons.
After their marriage, Anita went to stay with her husband at Khamgaon.
The defence of the accused persons was of denial.
Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows Shrirang PW 1 S o Yashwant Raut and Sou.
Nirmala PW 3 the elder sister of the deceased.
Learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon directed acquittal of accused 1, 2, 4 and 5.
Accused No.3 Suman is the mother in law, accused No.4 Pralhad S o Rangnath Ghodke is the father in law and accused number2 Raju S o Pralhad Ghodke and accused number5 Pappu S o Pralhad Ghodke are the brothers in law of Anita.
Five accused persons faced trial for alleged companymission of offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 and 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
During Diwali of 1990, Anita went to her parental house at Bhusawal and stayed there for about 4 5 days, During her stay Anita told her parents that her husband accused No.1 Vijay was demanding Rs.10,000/ and her mother in law accused No.3 Suman was demanding gold ring.
On the direction of Superintendent of Police, Buldana Crime No, 118/1991 under Sections 498 A and 304 B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered at Police Station, Khamgaon on 14.4.1991 against the accused persons.
It was found that Anita had companymitted suicide.
After receiving the letter, PW 1 Shrirang PW 1 went to the matrimonial house of Anita and asked her husband and mother in law to send Anita with him.
Then Shrirang PW 1 lodged report with Police Station, Khamgaon.
Hence they rushed to Khamgaon where they had to attend the funeral of Anita.
The appeal filed by the State was admitted only against the acquittal of present appellant.
On 7.2.1991 Shrirang PW 1 received a letter Exh.
By the companymon judgment two appeals were disposed of.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. In this appeal challenge is to the order passed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, allowing the appeal filed by the State.
