This appeal is by the father in law of the deceased who stands companyvicted for offences punishable under Section 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and a sentence of ten years and one year rigorous imprisonment respectively, and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act to a sentence of six months, all the sentences to run companycurrently.
The trial companyrt by its judgment dated 6th September, 1991, held that there was numbercategoric evidence against Sarju Devi, the mother in law as the primary evidence was against the appellant herein.
A First Information Report was, accordingly, lodged by P.W. 1 in which he spelt out that his son in law i.e. Chandrika Prasad was posted in Kashmir Crl.
Kamlesh Kumari died due to 100 per cent burn injuries on the 4th September, 1989.
This demand was repeated several times in the presence of P.W. 4 Babulal, the brother of P.W. 1 as well.
The trial companyrt, accordingly, acquitted Sarju Devi and companyvicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences.
An appeal was thereafter taken by the appellant to the High Court which has companyfirmed the judgment of the trial companyrt and dismissed this appeal.
A. 583 of 2004 and the appellant Ayodhya Prasad and his wife Sarju Devi, his parents were harassing her by demanding a Vicky Motor Cycle.
The facts leading to the appeal are as under Kamlesh Kumari Prasad, the deceased daughter of Ayodhya Prasad P.W. 1 was married to Chandrika Prasad about two years prior to the incident in question.
It is in this situation the matter is before us, after the grant of special leave.
It is further in evidence that on account of the number satisfaction of the demand Kamlesh Kumari was subjected to cruelty and was also denied her food.
It is the prosecution story that on account of this situation she companymitted suicide on the day in question.
