The m atter was, thereafter, taken in appeal before the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital.
The trial Court relying on the evidence of P W.1 Bachhu Das, the father of the deceased, P W 5 Budi Das w h o had allegedly seen the dead body being thrown into the Nandakani river by the three appellants on the 13 th June, 1989 and Jalmi Das P W.6 grand father of the deceased w h o 3 had given an application with regard to her having disappeared and duly companyroborated by the evidence of P W.4, Dr. Vinod Ku m ar who had companyducted the post m orte m and opined that the death had been caused by a blunt weapo n injury on the head and number by dro w ning companyvicted the appellants for the offences for w hich they had been charged.
At about 2.00 on 13 th June, 1999, Gap hloo Das ca m e to Bachhu Dass house and told him that Sati Devi had gone to the jungle to companylect grass but had number returned ho m e thereafter and he had suspected that she m ay have gone to his ho m e. Bachhu Das replied that Sati Devi had number companym e to his house.
The High Court in its judg m e nt dated 25 th April, 2007 allowed the appeal qua the offence under Sec.498A of the IPC holding that numberde m a n d for do wry had been m a d e but relying on the evidence affirmed the companyviction and sentence with respect to the other offences.
W h e n the Revenue police stilldid number proceed with the investigation despite the two applications aforesaid Bachhu Das filed yet another application on 28 th June, 1989 before the District M a gistrate, Cha m oli in w hich he alleged that the dead body of Sati Devi, his daughter, had been recovered on 24 th June, 1989 from the Nandakani river but in spite of this information having been companyveyed to the local Patwari numberaction had been taken by him.
The m atter was, thereafter, remitted to the Sessions Court in respect of offences punishable under Section 302/34 IPC and Section 498 A and 201 of the IPC, and as the accused appellants denied their involve me nt, the m atter was brought for trial.
This appeal by way of special leave arises out of the following facts Sati Devi deceased, daughter of Bachhu Das P W.1 was m arried with Diwani Ra m son of Gap hloo Das and Ruk m a ni Devi.
As he suspected that so m ething a miss had happened to Sati Devi, he reported the m atter to the Sub Divisional M a gistrate, Cha m oli, and also filed an application on 20 th June, 1989 before the Gra m 2 Sabhapati, Ustoli.
The District M a gistrate then ordered the necessary investigation w hich was m a d e by the Supervisor Kanoo n g o, w h o was the Investigating Officer, and w h o in due companyrse filed a charge sheet before the Court arraying Sati Devis husband Diwani Ra m and her in laws Gap hloo Ra m aand Ruk m a ni Devi as the accused.
At about 10 11 a.m. the very next day Gap hloo Das again ca m e to Bachhu Dass house and accused him of having hidden Sati Devi on w hich the latter again denied that she had companym e to his ho m e and on the companytrary expressed his surprise to kno w that she had been missing from her m atrimonial ho m e. Bachhu Das and others thereafter m a d e a search for Sati Devi but without success.
