K. Murugesan Vs. Rajalakshmi and - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- what remains to be seen is as to whether pinki died an un-natural death within seven years of her marriage and whether her death was attributable to the demand of dowry and further whether she was dealt with cruelty soon before her death. if these ingredients are proved by the prosecution then the conviction of the accused under section 304b, ipc will be complete.[para 9] the question is, in the absence of corpus delicti, could it be presumed that the accused persons alone were responsible for the death of pinki. we must hasten to add here that the accused persons have already been acquitted of the murder charge. [para 9] it is clear that pinki's death was caused because of the burns and not in the normal circumstances. the finding of the trial court and the appellate court in that behalf is correct. for this reason we are not impressed by the argument of the learned counsel that in the absence of corpus delicti, the conviction could not stand. [para10] it is clear that the prosecution has not only proved the offence under section 304b, ipc with the aid of section 113b, indian evidence act but also the offence under section 201, ipc. [para 15] held: we have gone through the judgments of the trial court as well as the appellate court carefully and we find that both the courts have fully considered all the aspects of this matter. we, therefore, find nothing wrong with the judgments and confirm the same. the appeal is, therefore, dismissed.[para 16]orderm. jaichandren, j.1. today, when these civil revision petitions were taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had sought the permission of this court to withdraw these civil revision petitions. he has also made an endorsement to that effect.2. based on the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and in view of the endorsement made, these civil revision petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Judgment:
ORDER

M. Jaichandren, J.

1. Today, when these Civil Revision Petitions were taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner had sought the permission of this Court to withdraw these Civil Revision Petitions. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

2. Based on the submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and in view of the endorsement made, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.