Ramgopal Vs. State of M.P. and ors.

Ramgopal vs State of M.P. and ors.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Oct 27, 2005

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/510063

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/510063
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Judge: S.K. Kulshrestha and ;Ashok Kumar Tiwari, JJ.
Decided On: Oct 27, 2005
Case Number: Criminal Revision No. 648 of 2005
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1055. Article 141; [A.K. Patnaik, C.J., Dipak Misra, Abhay Gohil, S. Samvatsar, & S.K. Gangele, JJ] Dismissal of SLP arising from decision of High Court Whether binding precedent Decision of Division Bench in Rama and Company v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [2007(II) MPJR 229] overruled by Ful...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Petition dismissed
Acts & sections: Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 304B, 306 and 498A

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ramgopal

Advocate Preeti Mishra, Adv.

Respondent

State of M.P. and ors.

Advocate G. Desai, Dy. Adv. General for Respondent No. 1 and ;Umesh Sharma, Adv. for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3

Legal References

Acts: Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 304B, 306 and 498A
Reported In: I(2006)DMC615

Excerpt

.....if there is assail to the order emerging from the inferior tribunal or subordinate courts has to be treated all the time for all purposes to be under article 227 of the constitution of india. it would depend upon the real nature of the order passed by the learned single judge. the pleadings also assume immense significance. it would not be an over emphasis to state that an order in a writ petition can fit into the subtle contour of articles 226 and 227 of the constitution in a composite manner and they can co-inside, co-exist, overlap or imbricate. in this context it is apt to note that there may be cases where the single judge may feel disposed or inclined to issue a writ to do full and complete justice because it is to be borne in mind that article 226 of the constitution is fundamentally a repository and reservoir of justice based on equity and good conscience. it will depend upon factual matrix of each case. dr. jaidev siddha v. jaiprakash siddha, 2007(2) mpjr (fb) 361: air 2007 mp 269 (fb) is not impliedly overruled in view of dismissal of slp preferred against order reported in rama and company v. state of madhya pradesh [2007 (2) mpjr 229 (db) (mp)]. - that there was no reliable evidence about cruelty or harassment in regard to demand for dowry, there does not appear any ground calling for interference......hearing of the revision at the motion stage, with the result, the respondents have participated today through their learned counsel.5. before adverting to the other circumstances, we may refer to the observations of the trial court that despite the fact that prosecution examined a large number of witnesses including the father of the deceased ramgopal (p.w. 8), her sister-in-law madhubala (p.w. 9), her mother kamlabai (p.w. 10), her brothers pankaj and anil (p.ws. 13 and 14), and her uncle vishnu prasad (p.w. 12), except madhubala (p.w. 9) and anil (p.w. 14), none stated anything about the demand of dowry. the evidence could not be attached much credence as during the span of six years of the married life of mamta, no serious incident took place to which they could refer and, therefore, it indicates that only for the sake of highlighting the incident and giving it a different dimension, the allegation of dowry demand was introduced. the real dispute between the parties appears to be the compassionate appointment given to the husband of the deceased on account of the death of her father-in-law in harness. naturally, accused manish as the son of the deceased and gitadevi, as his widow, claimed a latent lien and expected copious contribution by her husband to the family coffer which may have led to some estrangement but from this it cannot be inferred that it constituted abatement. had it been so, the element of dowry demand would not have been artificially introduced.6. in a revision against acquittal, it is not a mere error of appreciation of evidence or other infirmity, but only where it is shown that there is miscarriage of justice that this court would step in to interfere. the judgment of the trial court is based oil appreciation of evidence which is in no way perverse. on appreciation of evidence especially from the angle that it was a case of suicide; that the evidence of madhubala (p.w. 9) and anil (p.w. 14) was not in tune with the evidence of other.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 11.4.2005 of the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, in S.T. No. 323/2004 by which the learned Judge has acquitted the respondents of the charges under Sections 306, 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The case relates to the death of Mamtabai who was married to Manoj about six years prior to the date of her death on 15.7.2004. It was not disputed that the two respondents were also living with the deceased and her husband in Police Quarter C/17, Police Lines, Ujjain. According to the prosecution, on 15.7.2004, at about 8.00 p.m., Gitabai raised an alarm which attracted persons from the neighbourhood who witnessed that Mamta had locked herself in a room and after pouring kerosene over her, she had set herself afire. The door of the room was broken open, steps were taken to extinguish the fire by splashing water, but, by that time, she had been completely burnt and she was then taken to the District Hospital, Ujjain, where, during treatment she breathed her last at 4.00 a.m.

3. An inquest was registered, on the basis whereof it was found that on account of the harassment and cruel treatment extended by the two respondents in pursuance of the demand of dowry and as regards the compassionate appointment granted to her husband, as a consequence of the death of her father-in-law, she had committed suicide. The respondents denied the charges and on the basis of the evidence, the Trial Court found that offence was not brought home against any of the respondents and acquitted them. It is against this acquittal that the present applicant - father of the unfortunate girl Mamta - has filed this revision.

4. With a view to have a full view of the matter, notice was issued to the respondents for final hearing of the revision at the motion stage, with the result, the respondents have participated today through their learned Counsel.

5. Before adverting to the other circumstances, we may refer to the observations of the Trial Court that despite the fact that prosecution examined a large number of witnesses including the father of the deceased Ramgopal (P.W. 8), her sister-in-law Madhubala (P.W. 9), her mother Kamlabai (P.W. 10), her brothers Pankaj and Anil (P.Ws. 13 and 14), and her uncle Vishnu Prasad (P.W. 12), except Madhubala (P.W. 9) and Anil (P.W. 14), none stated anything about the demand of dowry. The evidence could not be attached much credence as during the span of six years of the married life of Mamta, no serious incident took place to which they could refer and, therefore, it indicates that only for the sake of highlighting the incident and giving it a different dimension, the allegation of dowry demand was introduced. The real dispute between the parties appears to be the compassionate appointment given to the husband of the deceased on account of the death of her father-in-law in harness. Naturally, accused Manish as the son of the deceased and Gitadevi, as his widow, claimed a latent lien and expected copious contribution by her husband to the family coffer which may have led to some estrangement but from this it cannot be inferred that it constituted abatement. Had it been so, the element of dowry demand would not have been artificially introduced.

6. In a revision against acquittal, it is not a mere error of appreciation of evidence or other infirmity, but only where it is shown that there is miscarriage of justice that this Court would step in to interfere. The judgment of the Trial Court is based oil appreciation of evidence which is in no way perverse. On appreciation of evidence especially from the angle that it was a case of suicide; that the evidence of Madhubala (P.W. 9) and Anil (P.W. 14) was not in tune with the evidence of other witnesses; that the incident had taken place after six years of marriage; that there was no reliable evidence about cruelty or harassment in regard to demand for dowry, there does not appear any ground calling for interference. We are, therefore, of the view that the order of acquittal does not call for any interference, much less in a revision against acquittal. The revision is accordingly dismissed.

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2005 Same Parties Ramgopal vs State of M.P. and ors. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge S.K. Kulshrestha and ;Ashok Kumar Tiwari, JJ. Acts & Sections Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 304B, 306 and 498A

Criminal miscarriage of justice In pursuance of trial court penal code in re