1. First Additional Sessions Judge, Mudwara has passed the impugned judgment dated 19.12.1995 in Sessions Trial No. 429/89 by which appellants/accused have been convicted under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 500/- and appellants/accused No. 1 to 3 have also been convicted under Section 306 of IPC and sentenced to undergo for five years with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, with default stipulations. Being aggrieved, the appellants/accused have preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code.
2. Is is undisputed that Jagola S/o Dhanju Gadari (A/2) and Chironjia Bai W/o Jagola Gadar (A/3) had been died during the pendency of appeal. Case against them stand abated.
3. Prosecution case in short is that Ramlal (PW2), father of the deceased, lodged a report on 28.6.87 at Police Station Kuthla to the effect that her daughter Galabai (deceased) was married with Shiv Prasad (A/1). He further alleged that Shiv Prasad (A/1) and his mother, father and sister (A/2, A/3 and A/4) were committed cruelty with Galabai. Once Galabai was beaten, therefore, a Panchayat was assembled and Panchayat imposed the fine of Rs. 61/- on appellant No. 2 Jagola, father-in-law, of deceased. According to the complainant, Galabai died in her matrimonial house. On the basis of aforesaid report A.A. Khan (PW9) registered a Marg and during Marg investigation, he prepared the panchnama of dead body Ex.P/3. Dead body of Galabai was sent for postmortem. Dr. Smt. M. Thakur (PW12) performed the postmortem on the body of deceased and opined that there was foul smell from the body of the deceased, therefore she could not be able to opine the cause of death. She preserved the vicra which was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar, in which Assistant Chemical Examiner found Zinc Oxide (powder of rat killer).
4. After usual investigation appellants /accused were charge sheeted. Learned Trial Court framed the charges under Section 306 and 498-A of IPC against them. The appellants/accused abjured the charges and pleaded innocence.
5. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, on appraisal of the evidence on record, convicted and sentenced appellants mentioned herein above.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that appellant No. 4 Chutobai is the nand of deceased and she was remained with her matrimonial house which is far away from the place of incident. He further submitted that main allegation was against appellants No. 2 and 3 (Jagola and Chironjia Bai). Since both of appellants/accused died during the trial of this appeal, the same is already stand abated against them. He further submitted that appellant No.1 Shiv Prasad has remained in custody for about eight months since complainant Ramlal, father of deceased Galabai, entered into a compromise with appellants and did not want to prosecute them, in these circumstances, if appellant No. 1 Shiv Prasad is convicted for the period of sentence already undergone then end of justice would be meet out.
7. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for State justified and supported the impugned judgment.
8. I have perused the impugned judgment, evidence and other material on record. It reveals from the evidence of Meerabai (PW1) and Ramlal (PW2) and the fact that there was a Panchayat assembled, appellant No. 2 Jagola (since deceased) was fined Rs. 61/-. In these circumstances, for causing the cruelty, appellant No.2 Jagola and his wife Chironjia was responsible alongwith appellant No. 1 Shiv Prasad. It is undisputed that Galabai was died due to consuming the poison.
9. From the evidence of Meerabai (PW1) and Sunderiyabai (PW3), it is clearly established that marriage of Galabai and appellant No.1 Shiv Prasad was solemnized ten years back to the date of incident. In these circumstances, without specific evidence in regard to instigation, conspiracy or adding by appellants, it cannot be presumed that she committed suicide due to cruelty caused by appellants to her. In these circumstances, the offence under Section 306 of IPC cannot be said to be made out against the appellant No. 1 and therefore, he be acquitted to the charge under Section 306 of IPC.
10. On careful scanning of evidence on record, it is found that appellant No. 4 Chutobai is a nand and she is a married lady, it cannot be presumed that she was remained at his paternal house and committed cruelty to deceased Galabai. In these circumstances, there is no reliable evidence on record against appellant No. 4 Chutobai and she is entitled to get benefit of doubt. She is hereby acquitted to the charges under Section 498-A of IPC.
11. Considering the aforesaid evidence on record, an offence under Section 498-A of IPC is proved against the appellant No. 1, 2 and 3. Since appellant No. 2 and 3 had already died and appeal against them stand abated, the conviction and sentence under Section 498-A awarded by the trial Court to the appellants is hereby affirmed. Father of deceased Galabai has entered into a compromise with appellant No.1 Shiv Prasad and submitted that he did not want to prosecute further, in these circumstances, if appellant who remained in jail during trial about eight months is convicted for the sentence of jail already undergone and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, end of justice would be meet out.
12. Thus, appeal is partly allowed. Appellant No. 4 Chutobai is acquitted to the charges under Section 498-A of IPC and appellant No. 1 Shiv Prasad is acquitted to the charges under Section 306 of IPC and his conviction under Section 498-A of IPC awarded by the trial Court is confirmed. His sentence is altered to jail sentence already undergone (eight months) and fine of Rs. 1,000/-.
13. Appellants are on bail. Their bail bond stand discharged.