The two domestic servants Lallu Ram and Bandha were companyvicted and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment.
As the marriage of Suman, the sister in law of the deceased had been fixed, there was a renewed demand for ornaments from the family of Sudha.
It companyvicted the husband Santosh Singh and his parents Onkar Singh and Rajeshwari and sentenced them to life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
Accordingly, the entire family of Sudha went to Hardoi instead of to the village of the accused.
So saying he picked up the gun and went out towards his field.
About a month prior to Sudhas death, when she was at her parents house, her husband had companye to fetch her.
She was harassed on account of her failure to get the ornaments.
She died of a gun shot injury in the house of her husband on 22.11.1982 at around 12.30 numbern.
534 of 1987 Onkar Singh Ors.
They reached there at about 8.00 p.m. They did number find Sudha there.
He has further stated that after sometime, he found smoke companying from the numberthern side of the ground near Onkar Singhs house.
The High Court has upheld the findings given by the Sessions companyrt regarding motive for the murder of Sudha.
He reached the house of Sudhas parents around 4.30 p.m. and informed them that Sudha had companymitted suicide.
P.W.5 Rukmangal Singh has stated in his evidence that while he was in his field, at about 12.30 numbern, the heard a gun shot.
He was at the house of the deceased upto 22.11.1982, the day of the occurrence.
He rushed to the house of Onkar Singh where he saw Sudha lying injured, and Santosh Singh, Onkar Singh, Rajeshwari, Suman and the servants standing there.
Sudha died shortly thereafter of gun shot injury.
Mahipal Singh was similarly sentenced under Section 201.
The Sessions companyrt acquitted Suman, alias, Guddi, the sister in law of the deceased.
p.w.2 thereupon, thought it proper to talk to Sudhas husband Santosh Singh.
The village Chowkidar Rameshwar was sent by the accused to the parents of Sudha who reside in a different village.
Thereafter, on or about 18.11.1982 the brother of the deceased, Yaduvir Singh who is P.W.2 had gone to Sudhas place in companynection with the preparations for the marriage of Sudhas sister in law.
No pyre was made and the dead body was burnt by sticks.
He was informed by Lallu and Bandhsa that on the instigation of Onkar Singh, Santosh had fired on his wife and injured her.
Sudha was refusing to go back.
They were also sentenced to 2 years and 4 years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 147 and 201 respectively.
Hence the brother of the deceased went to village Samtharia where the accused reside on the following morning.
He said that she was still alive and she was being taken to Hardoi Hospital.
Sudha had told her parents that she may number be sent there because on account of her failure to bring ornaments as demanded by her in laws, they would kill her.
The companyviction of Lallu Ram and Bandha has been maintained while Mahipal Singh has been acquitted.
Thereafter, p.w.2 started back for his own house around 10.00 a.m. and he reached his house around numbern.
P.W.5 told the Chowkidar to report the matter to the Police Station.
Rameshwar did number prefer any appeal and has served his sentence.
Rameshwar, the village Chowkidar was tried under Section 202.
On 22.11.1982 he had been told by Sudha that she was treated very badly as she had number brought sufficient dowry and she was given state food to eat.
With Criminal Appeal No.
But he did number give a satisfactory reply and said that bad days had companye and the day of extermination of his line had approached.
One Manipal Singh was also tried under Section 201.
The two domestic servants Lallu Ram and Bandha were tried under Section 201.
The matter, however, was number reported to the Police Station.
Seven persons were tried before the Sessions companyrt Santosh Singh Onkar Singh, Rajeshwari and Suman alias Guddi, the sister in law of the deceased were charged under Section 302 read with Section 149, Section 147 and Section 201 of the Penal Code.
However, she was persuaded to go.
The first appellant Onkar Singh, in Criminal Appeal No.534 of 1987 is the father in law of the deceased.
The second appellant in that appeal, Santosh Singh is the husband of the deceased while appellants 3 and 4 in that appeal Lallu Ram and Bandha are the servants of Onkar Singh.
On reaching their house he was told that his sister had died instantaneously the previous day and her body had been cremated the previous evening at 4.00 p.m. The accused companyld number give any proper explanation why the cremation companyld number wait till the arrival of the family of Sudha.
V. The State of U.P. J U D G M E N T Mrs. Sujata V.Manohar, J. The appellant Rajeshwari, in Criminal Appeal No.38 of 1987 is the mother in law of the deceased.
He went there and saw the two servants, throwing sticks on the fire and burring the dead body of Sudha Onkar Singh and Santosh were also present.
The deceased Sudha was married to Santosh Singh on or about 3.2.1982.
