State Of U.P. vs Bharat Prasad
2023 Latest Caselaw 15444 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:34962
 
Court No. - 27
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 378 No. - 150 of 2014
 

 
Applicant :- State of U.P.
 
Opposite Party :- Bharat Prasad
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

1. Heard Sri Brijendra Singh, learned AGA-I for applicant State and perused record.

2. This application has been filed for leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 3.6.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Sitapur in Sessions Trial No.166/2009, Case Crime No.46 of 2005 whereby the accused respondent has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him.

3. As per prosecution case,it has been stated that the complainant married his daughter Nitu four years back with accused respondent Bharat Prasad as per Hindu rites. He had given dowry as per his capacity. The accused respondent used to demand additional dowry of Rs.20,000/- and a buffalo which was refused by the complainant. The FIR further indicates that accused respondent used to harass the deceased and many times they tried to kill her. Whenever his daughter came to house, she always made complaint against her inlaws. The complainant used to pacify his daughter. The complainant was informed by the police on 20.12.2004 that his daughter and her two children died due to burn injuries. It is further alleged in the FIR that for not fulfilling demand of dowry, the incident has occurred and the deceased was burn to death. The report was lodged on 24.2.2005 in case crime No.45 of 2005 under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, PS Pisawan, district Sitapur.

4. The case was investigated. The statement of witnesses were recorded by the police and it was found that marriage was beyond seven years, therefore, chargesheet was filed under Section 306 IPC against the accused respondent. The charges were framed under Section 306 IPC and the accused respondent pleaded not guilty and requested for trial.

5. The prosecution produced prosecution witness PW-1 Ram Asrey, PW-2 Kanti, PW-3 Dr. Pankaj Srivastava, PW-4 Constable Banasri Lal Gupta, PW-5 I.O. Subhash Chandra Gangvar and PW-6 Constable Ashok Kumar Ram.

6. The accused respondent was confronted under Section 313 CrPC and he deposed before the Court that he was falsely implicated. He further deposed before the Court that his wife Nitu did not want to live in his village Wazir Nagar and she had illicit relation with her brother-in-law Sudeep and further pleaded that he was not present in the house and the deceased committed suicide.

7. The Trial Court after adducing evidence on record acquitted the accused respondent, hence the State has filed the present application for leave to appeal along with memo of appeal.

8. PW-3 Dr. Pankaj Kumar Srivastava who conducted post mortem on all the three bodies, on 21.12.2004 was examined before the Trial Court and he has proved the injuries of deceased and the cause of death of the deceased Smt. Nitu, aged about 25 years, deceased Gudia aged about 04 years) and deceased Ankit aged about 06 years.

9. As per post mortem report, deceased Smt. Nitu received following injuries on her body:-

"I0 to III0 Burns all over the body (100%) was riging of hairs of scalp, eyebrow, genitals, blisters are found containing serous fluid, base as raised red colour."

The cause of death of deceased Smt. Nitu was due to asphyxia as a result of anti mortem burns.

10. Deceased Gudia received following injuries on her body:-

"I0 to III0 Burns all over the body (100%), riging of hairs of scalp, eyebrow, , contains blisters serous fluid and base are red colour."

The cause of death of deceased Gudia was due to shock as a result of anti mortem burns.

11. Deceased Ankit received following injuries on his body:-

"I0 to III0 Burns all over the body, riging of scalp hairs seen, blisters are seen on places with serous fluid and base of blisters are red. (100% Burns)"

The cause of death of deceased Ankit was due to shock as a result of anti mortem burns.

12. PW-1 and PW-2 are the father and mother of the deceased Smt. Nitu. They have supported the prosecution case in their examination-in-chief.

13. PW-1 Ram Asrey moved an application under Section 156 (3) CrPC against 14 persons. But he could not state as to why he lodged report against 14 persons. The statement of PW-2 Smt. Kanti has been recorded before the Court and she has stated that Bharat, Shatrohan (brother), Vishambhar (father), Ramrati (mother) and Rajendra (maternal uncle) had demanded one buffalo and Rs.20,000/-. She has further deposed before the Court that said demand was made during marriage. PW-1 Ram Asrey has deposed before the Court that no dowry was demanded at the time of marriage. Similarly, PW-2 Kanti in her cross-examination has deposed that she had told the accused respondent that she was poor and she was unable to fulfil the demand of dowry. Thus, the statement of fact that the accused respondent demanded buffalo and Rs.20,000/- for dowry, appears to be false on the face of record.

14. PW-1 Ram Asrey has deposed that he had given dowry as per his financial condition. He further deposed that the accused respondent did not demand dowry at the time of marriage. It is, thus, clear that the allegation of demand of dowry is not proved by the PW-1 and PW-2 who have admitted that her deceased daughter remained with the applicant for 11 years after marriage. PW-1 deposed before the Court that the accused respondent used to live at village Wazir Nagar prior to one week from the date of incident. His daughter did not like to live in Wazir Nagar. He had admitted that accused respondent used to live in Wazir Nagar in spite of disliking of his deceased daughter Smt. Nitu. The same has been admitted by PW-2 mother of the deceased Smt. Nitu. PW-2 has admitted before the Court that her deceased daughter did not like to live in Wazir Nagar and she wanted to live at village Marhia. She further deposed that her elder son-in-law also made protest and he also wanted that the accused respondent and the deceased daughter Smt. Nitu should remain at Marhia. It is further admitted that son-in-law frequently used to come to the house of the accused respondent which was opposed by the accused respondent. The deceased had illicit relation with Sunil that is why she wanted to live at Marhia village. The aforesaid facts indicate that suicide has been committed out of differences between the husband and wife.

15. PW-3 Dr. Pankaj Kumar Srivastava has been examined and he has deposed before the Court that all the three deceased died due to burn injuries and he deposed that there was no smell of kerosene oil from the bodies of the deceased. PW-5 Subhash Chandra Gangvar who is Investigating Officer was also examined before the Court. He deposed that the complainant had mentioned that his daughter was married prior to four years and his wife PW-2 told that her daughter was marriage to the accused respondent prior to six years. After investigation it was found that marriage was performed prior to eight years. He further deposed that witness Ram Naresh Suresh stated that the deceased did not want to live at Wazir Nagar and she committed suicide along with two children. Witness Ram Bharosey, Rame Devi, Kaushilya, Subedar, Ram Saran , Bhagwan Din, Baldi Ram Lakhan and Kokila had given affidavit to the Investigating Officer in which they stated that deceased died by burning herself and committed suicide. Ram Bharosey witness has stated under Section 161 CrPC before the Investigating Officer that there was quarrel between the applicant and the deceased and she did not want to live in village Wazir Nagar. He further stated that the deceased was alone and the house was bolt from inside and door was broken because she had committed suicide along with her two children by burning herself. Witness Ram Lakhan had made statement under Section 161 CrPC that the deceased had illicit relation with her brother-in-law (Bahnoi) Sunil. The witness Kokila also stated that the deceased had illicit relation with her brother-in-law. The record does not reveal the fact that any kind of abetment was done by the accused respondent in committing the crime. The minor son and the minor daughter of the accused respondent were also burnt by the deceased. The deceased immolated herself along with her two children due to reason that she did not want to live at village Wazir Nagar.

16. The Trial Court has passed the judgment on 3.6.2014 on the sound reasoning and no interference in the same is required. The application for leave to appeal is liable to be rejected.

17. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is rejected and the appeal is also dismissed.

Order Date :- 17.5.2023

Rajneesh JR-PS)