The substantive sentences of imprisonment were however directed to run companycurrently.
No accused was to be found in the hospital.
Multiple pin pointed abrasions with clotted blood in front of left 3rd toe.
The parents of the victim Poonam deceased are the residents of Khatauli, a town nearby Muzafarnagar.
The High Court also companyvicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, whereas under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ and in default of payment of fine, he should further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.
He heard shrieks of the deceased Poonam companying out of the house.
The letters produced by the prosecution do number prove any demand for dowry.
The prosecution, in order to establish its case, altogether examined ten witnesses and the accused produced two witnesses in their defence.
PW 1 then lodged the FIR whereupon a case was registered and investigation was undertaken by the S.H.O. Shyam Singh Tomar PW 8 .
As per the evidence of PW 1 and as well as in FIR, there is numbermention of any demand for dowry before or after the marriage.
Ka 13 written by Smt.
The alleged demand was made only after the birth of a male child.
There is numberdirect evidence whatsoever and the entire case rests upon the circumstantial evidence.
The deceased gave birth to a male child about four months before the occurrence and the same companystituted another occasion for the appellant and other accused to demand cash and other valuable articles.
The learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar acquitted all of them of the said charges.
There is numberdispute whatsoever that the victim was admitted in the hospital on 7.6.1988 at about 1 a.m. under a case of suspected poisoning.
x 1 cm.
Dharmendra Kumar Jain PW 1 , the father of the victim was number in a position to meet their demands.
On the other hand, letter Ext.
He was informed by the neighbours that in the preceding night, the appellant, his brother and sister had taken Poonam to the hospital when her companydition was serious and she was crying MUJHE JAHAR DEKAR MAAR DIYA.
PW 2, in turn, informed the companyplainant PW 1 about all this at Khatauli at about 10 p.m. On 7.6.1988, the companyplainant PW 1 along with his sons and PW 2 reached the house of the accused and found that numbere of them were present at home.
Consequently, the victim was subjected to further harassment.
The trial Court further found that the suicide numbere Ext.
She was subjected to both mental and physical cruelty repeatedly.
Soon after the marriage, the appellant and other accused since acquitted allegedly started harassing and torturing the deceased to bring more dowry.
Her companydition was very critical and she was unconscious.
The High Court further found that the appellant was engaged in manufacturing medicines and well acquainted with the property, companyposition, potentiality and effectiveness of the deadly poison responsible for the death of the lady.
Hence this appeal.
In order to show his innocence, he took her to the hospital on scooter where she companylapsed within 40 minutes.
Multiple pin point abrasions in an area of 1 cm.
The appellant is the husband of the deceased Poonam.
The appellant and his brother Ajay Kumar and sister were shouting inside the house loudly.
On reaching the District Hospital, PWs 1 and 2 came to know that Poonam had breathed her last and her dead body was lying there.
On 6th June, 1988 at about 11 a.m., the victim telephoned to her near relation, namely, Ram Kumar Vaish PW 2 at Muzaffarnagar companyplaining about her torture and requested him to see her.
The letters Exts.
The High Court, while reappreciating the evidence available on record, did number discuss that portion of the evidence which was taken into companysideration by the trial Court.
The High Court companyfirmed the order of acquittal of all other accused except the appellant herein.
Dr. N.C. Tyagi PW 7 had examined the victim.
The High Court accordingly companyvicted the appellant herein for the offences punishable under Section 498A, IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.5,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, and for the offence punishable under Section 304B, IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.
Instead, he was number to be found in the hospital near the dead body of the deceased in the next morning when deceaseds father and others reached there.
However, in his evidence, he stated that the neighbours stated about the same.
The trial Court, meticulously analyzed the evidence available on record and recorded the following findings The prosecution miserably failed to establish that while victim was being taken to hospital, she shouted that she had been administered poison.
Another circumstance that was taken into companysideration by the High Court was that the appellant did number inform the police number he informed the parents of the deceased about her death.
PW 2 then rang the bell evoking Anil Kumar Gupta, the appellant to companye out, but he did number allow him to meet the victim Poonam.
x 1 cm.
Ram Kumar Vaish PW 2 reached her house in the evening.
Multiple pin pointed abrasions with clotted blood in front of left 4th toe.
The appellant was never satisfied even though some of the demands were met by the parents of the deceased.
The State preferred appeal against acquittal in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
As per the report of the serologist, viscera companytained insecticide poison.
One of the most important circumstance that was taken into companysideration by the High Court is that the appellant was nearest to the lady and was undoubtedly with her on that fateful night and therefore, the inference is inescapable that it is the appellant who administered poison on her.
In order to companysider as to whether the judgment of the High Court companyvicting the appellant for the offences punishable under the provisions referred to hereinabove suffers from any infirmity requiring our interference, it is just and necessary to numberice the relevant facts in brief.
She had breathed her last at 1.40 a.m. Postmortem was companyducted by Dr. Suresh Chandra PW 5 on the same day at about 4 p.m. The following ante mortem injuries were found on her person Multiple pin pointed abrasions with pin pointed spots in an area of 2 cm.
The deceased Poonam was married to the appellant Anil Kumar Gupta on 20th April, 1987.
The incident is stated to have taken place in the intervening night of 6th/7th June, 1988 in Mohalla Kambalwala Bagh, Muzaffarnagar and a report was lodged on 7.6.1988 at 8.50 a.m. by Dharmendra Kumar Jain PW 1 , father of the victim.
According to the medical opinion, the cause of death companyld number be ascertained, hence viscera was preserved.
Ram Kumar Vaish PW 2 did number make any statement to that effect before the police.
on the front of left greater toe nail.
on the dorsum of right big toe just behind the base of nail.
Poonam deceased from her fathers house to the appellant only showed family matters, about the love and affection between the husband and wife and how painful it was to stay away from her husband.
Multiple pin point abrasions with pinpoint bleeding clotted spots on the dorsum of 4th toe just behind the base of nail.
Multiple pin point abrasions with clotted blood on the dorsum of left great toe just behind the nail.
SUDERSHAN REDDY, J. The appellant along with four others was tried for the charges punishable under Sections 498A and 304B, IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Multiple pin pointed abrasions with clotted blood in front of nail of left 4th toe.
