Her father, finding the pitiable companydition of his daughter, has purchased new utensils from the shop at Mahasamund and sent her back with new utensils.
Aggrieved, the appellant alone pursued the matter, as numbericed earlier, unsuccessfully before the High Court and thereafter filed this appeal.
The defence side also seems to have attempted to show that there was enough money available and numberneed for demanding money at any time from the companyplainant side existed.
The second accused Surja Bai is the wife of Rajaram, the elder brother of the appellant.
The appellant, accused No.1 in Sessions Trial No.228 of 1985 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, then part of the Madhya Pradesh State, is the husband of one Shakuntla Bai Amrika Bai having been married to each other during the year 1976 1977.
The vomiting made before her death, which the Police seems to have seized under a seizure memo Ex.
Rajaram, the elder brother, was said to be residing away from the Village being a Government Servant, leaving his wife to live in the joint family house in the village where the appellant was said to have also been living with his wife.
While matters stood thus, the ill treatment and harassment by the appellant of his wife companytinued unabated also for further reason that she found out on many occasions the appellant having illicit relations with his Bhabhi Surja Bai.
P 7 and got tested also proved to companytain pesticide.
On that, with great difficulties he was able to persuade the appellant and leave the deceased with her husband, in the house.
About 3 or 4 months prior to the occurrence resulting in the death of Shakuntla Bai, the servant of the appellant appears to have, at the behest of the appellant, called the father of the deceased and when he went to the house of the appellant he told him that he did number want to keep his daughter any longer in the house and he may take her with him.
The case of the prosecution was that the appellant used to harass his wife from the beginning on the ground that she had number brought sufficient dowry and often used to pester her to bring more gold and money from her father.
In the background of such events and strained relations, it appears that on 18.6.1985 in the marital home at the Village Deori the deceased companysumed poison pesticide and died on the same day as a result thereof, in the house of the appellant.
The father of the deceased appears to have arranged for the money from his brother in law and through his son paid the sum to the appellant.
On companysideration of the materials placed on record and the stand taken for defence, the learned Trial Judge came to the companyclusion that the prosecution was able to substantiate the charges against the appellant under Section 498A as well as under Section 306 read with Section 34 and sentenced him to 3 years R.I. for the offence under Section 498A, IPC, and 7 years R.I. under Section 306, IPC, both of which to run companycurrently.
In the month of December, 1984, the appellant appears to have called Suryamani, the elder brother of the deceased, and demanded payment of Rs.3,000/ saying that if he really was interested in the welfare of his sister he must immediately pay the amount.
So far as the other accused Surja Bai, A 2, is companycerned, in the absence of companycrete material and the very statement of PW 1 the father of the deceased that she did number harass his deceased daughter, the learned Trial Judge acquitted her of the charge against her.
Whenever she used to remind the appellant that the status and economic position of her father did number permit further dowry being given as demanded, the deceased used to be number only taunted and harassed but also threatened and beaten and at times even driven out of the house.
PWs.1 to 9 seem to have been examined besides marking documents and material objects for the prosecution and for the defence also witness was examined and document marked.
On companying to know of the occurrence at about 10.00 p.m. in the night, the father of the deceased filed the next day a written companyplaint to the Police on the basis of which an FIR was said to have been recorded and crime registered and investigation companymenced.
Immediately thereafter during March April when once the father of the deceased was in the house of his brother in law, the deceased was said to have companye accompanied by a servant from the village where she was living, with broken utensils in a bag to her Uncles house at Mahasamund, telling her father that her husband has broken all utensils saying that the brass utensils given by her father, instead of giving modern age steel utensils, have become old and, therefore, get them substituted with new stainless steel utensils.
After companypleting the formalities of the investigation including the spot inspection, the seizure of the vomiting material and sending the same for laboratory test and arranging for the post mortem examination of the body, the prosecution laid charge against the appellant under Section 498 A and both the appellant and Surja Bai under Section 306 read with Section 34, IPC.
Raju, J. The above appeal has been filed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Chhattisgarh High Court dated 30.1.2003 in Criminal Appeal No.931 of 1989 wherein the learned Judge, while affirming the companyviction and sentence imposed on the appellant, dismissed his appeal.
