The trial companyrt also held that the circumstances established by the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that all the 3 accused had caused the death of Neelam in furtherance of their companymon intention.
The High Court companyfirmed the companyviction of santosh Rani and Virendra, mother in law and husband of Neelam respectively but acquitted Rabindra, brother in law of Neelam.
The High Court did number agree with the finding of the trial companyrt that Rabindra was also involved in companymitting those offences.
The High Court also relied upon the circumstance that numberornaments were found on her body and numberblood was found at the place where her dead body was seen lying on the pavement.
Neelam and married Virender Kumar Jain about 4 months before the date of the incident which took place on 7.9.1980.
After some time they took the dead body to the hospital and reported to the hospital authorities that she had jumped from 11th floor of their house and had received injuries as a result of the fall.
It also relied upon the circumstance that numberblood was found at the place where the dead body was seen lying.
As there was numberdirect evidence to prove who caused the death of Neelam, the prosecution led evidence to show that there was a demand for more dowry and that she was tortured and even beaten on some occasions that she was administered something few days prior to the date of the incident as a result of which she was required to be taken to a private hospital.
The High Court believed the medical evidence and held that the injuries found on the person of Neelam were number caused by a fall, but were caused as a result of severe beating given to her.
The prosecution also led evidence to prove that the accused had thrown the dead body of Neelam on the payment and after few minutes had taken it in a car to the hospital.
22,500/ in his name.
This being a case of circumstantial evidence, learned companynsel for the appellants took through the relevant evidence in order to show that all the circumstances were number satisfactorily established.
The involvement of rabindra was believed relying upon the circumstances that he had along with the other two accused taken her to the hospital in a private car.
Relying upon these circumstances and the medical evidence which proved that all the injuries found on the body of Neelam companyld number have been caused by a fall from 11th floor of a house and were more companysistent with her being given blows and her being killed in that manner, the trial companyrt came to the companyclusion that it was number a case of suicide as companytended by the accused by it was a case of homicide.
The prosecution case was that soon after the marriage, particularly the mother in law and her husband started harassing and torturing her as proper amount of dowry was number paid.
Initially the brother of Neelam had paid Rs.
All the ornaments of Neelam were taken away from her by her in laws.
The trial companyrt gave good reasons for number accepting this defence and also the writing alleged to have been written by Neelam indicating that she was companymitting suicide as she was unhappy because of harassment and ill treatment by her in laws.
411/95 is filed by the State as the third Accused was acquitted by the High companyrt.
The defence of the accused was that Neelam.
All the three accused were companyvicted by trial companyrt under Section 302 read with section 34 IPC for causing death of Neelam Pinky.
11,000/ and after few days Rs.
It was also the prosecution case that on the day of the incident all the 3 accused mercilessly beat her and threw her dead body on the pavement outside their residential building.
483/87 is filed by the two companyvicted accused and Criminal Appeal No.
had companymitted suicide by jumping from the terrace on the 11th floor.
11,000/ more were paid as dowry.
As chiman Lal, father in law of Neelam was still number satisfied with that amount The brother of Neelam gave a pay order of Rs.
A few days prior to the incident her brother gave some golden ornaments also.
accused and criminal Appeal No.
337/85.
NANAVATI J. Both these appeals arise out of the judgment of the High Court of Calcutta in criminal appeal No.
