The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Om Prakash Kori on 19 February, 2026

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306




                                                                     1                                     CRA-6347-2023
                                IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                       AT JABALPUR
                                                       BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                         &
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN
                                                    ON THE 19th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
                                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6347 of 2023
                                                  THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                              Versus
                                                        OM PRAKASH KORI
                           Appearance:
                                Shri Manas Mani Verma - Government Advocate for the appellant/State.
                                None for the respondent.

                           Heard on:        30.01.2026
                           Delivered on: 19.02.2026
                           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 JUDGMENT

Per: Justice Ratnesh Chandra Singh Bisen

Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the appellant/State is heard finally.

2. This criminal appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 30.01.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sidhi, M.P., in Sessions Trial No. 82/2002, whereby the respondent, Om Prakash Kori was acquitted of the charges under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

3. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is as under:-

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

2 CRA-6347-2023 3.1 The accused Om Prakash Kori married the deceased, Reenu Kori, on 24th June 2019. At the time of marriage, the deceased's father provided dowry articles to the accused according to his financial capacity. After returning to her parental home, the deceased informed her mother that the accused frequently alleged that her parents had not given sufficient dowry.

The accused also demanded Rs. 50,000 from her parents for the purchase of a motorcycle and subjected the deceased to physical and mental cruelty due to this demand. On 13th February 2022, the accused informed the deceased's mother by telephone that he had vandalised household property and locked the house. As a result of continuous harassment and cruelty by the accused, the deceased committed suicide by hanging at her matrimonial home on 13 February 2022.

3.2 Based on the information provided by Shankar Prasad Kori, a case was registered at Police Station Amilia regarding the suicide of the deceased by hanging. As the deceased was a newly married woman, the Executive Magistrate issued notices to five witnesses, as per Ex. P-4, to be present during the post-mortem examination. In their presence, the body was sent to the Community Health Centre, Sihawal, via application Ex. P-8 for post- mortem examination. The post-mortem report was subsequently obtained (Ex. P-11).

3.3 The piece of saree used by the deceased for hanging, her viscera, and a sealed hospital sample were received and prepared seizure memos Ex.P-13 and Ex.P-14. A site map of the place of occurrence (Ex.P-9) was prepared. After the post-mortem, the body was handed over to her family for cremation

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

3 CRA-6347-2023 through delivery memo Ex.P-10. Witness statements were recorded during the inquest. After the inquest, and on finding a prima facie case against the accused, Crime No. 100/22 was registered, and the First Information Report (Ex.P-15) was lodged. The spot panchnama (Ex.P-2), trace map (Ex.P-3), and report (Ex.P-1) were obtained from the Patwari. The accused was arrested as per arrest panchnama Ex.P-7. The seized articles were sent for chemical examination and then forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar, with the deposit receipt recorded as Ex.P-19. During the investigation, statements of witnesses Triveni, Meena, and Rajneesh were recorded by the police.

3.4 After prima facie evidence was found against the respondent/accused, a charge was framed under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The charges were read and explained to the accused, who pleaded not guilty.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/State submitted that the trial court failed to properly consider the evidence on record. The prosecution clearly established that the deceased was harassed for dowry. Since the deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of her marriage, the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act applies. All essential ingredients of Section 304-B IPC were proved, as the deceased was subjected to dowry- related cruelty soon before her death. Continuous demands for dowry were also established through reliable witness testimony, attracting Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Cruelty under Section 498-A IPC was

independently proved by consistent evidence. Minor contradictions in

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

4 CRA-6347-2023 witness statements are natural and do not weaken the prosecution's case. The accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act. Therefore, the impugned judgment is erroneous and should be set aside.

5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/State and perused the record of the trial Court.

6. In order to bring home the charges, the prosecution has examined as many as eleven witnesses before the trial Court.

7. Triveni Kori (PW-5), father of the deceased stated that his daughter married the accused, Om Prakash, on June 24, 2021. A farewell ceremony was held during the wedding, and Reenu often visited her parental home afterward. About one to two months after the marriage, Om Prakash allegedly harassed Reenu and demanded money, claiming that her father had given nothing at the wedding and asking for Rs. 50,000/- for a vehicle. He stated that he called Om Prakash and asked him to stop harassing Reenu. He deposed that he went to Surat shortly after the wedding for work and returned on February 12, 2022. On the morning of February 13, he called Om Prakash to speak with Reenu, but Om Prakash said he had broken household items, locked the house, and gone to the fields, so Reenu could not come to the phone. At around 9:00 a.m., Om Prakash informed him that Reenu had hanged herself in the kitchen. He and his family immediately went to Sonvarsha, where the police and Tehsildar were already present. He saw Reenu hanging in the kitchen. A panchnama was prepared, and her body was taken to Sihawal Hospital for postmortem. Police recorded his

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

5 CRA-6347-2023 statement. He further stated that Om Prakash's harassment and demand for Rs. 50,000/- caused Reenu's distress, leading her to commit suicide. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he went to Surat within a week of the wedding and did not meet his daughter again until her death. He further admitted that Om Prakash never directly demanded a motorcycle or Rs. 50,000/- from him. He deposed that Om Prakash paid for Reenu's college education, and she attended college, sometimes visiting home. His daughter never complained to him about any harassment. He further admitted that neither he, his family, nor his daughter filed any police complaint or held a panchayat regarding the matter during her lifetime.

8. Meena Kori (PW-2), the mother of the deceased Reenu Kori, and Rajneesh Kori (PW-6), her brother, both corroborated the statement of PW-

5. In paragraph 6 of her cross-examination, she stated that her daughter was a college student who travelled between her matrimonial home and parental home, and that her husband never interfered in this matter. She further admitted that the deceased never complained about any difficulties at her in- laws' house and that she could not explain the reason for her daughter's suicide. She clearly stated that the deceased did not face any hardship at her matrimonial home during her lifetime. She also admitted that she did not give any statement to the police after her daughter's death. In paragraph 7 of her cross-examination, this witness admitted that the accused never demanded Rs. 50,000 for a motorcycle. She stated that both families were poor and in similar financial condition, and that she could not have arranged Rs. 50,000/- . She further stated that she owns an old mobile phone, and that the deceased

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

6 CRA-6347-2023 had a mobile phone provided by the accused.

9. Shankar Kori (PW-4), uncle of the deceased Reenu Kori, deposed that the accused, Om Prakash, is his nephew, being the son of his younger brother Budhsen. He stated that Kori had been married to Om Prakash for seven to eight years before Reenu's death. He further deposed that Reenu Kori committed suicide by hanging, but he does not know the reason for her death. He informed the police about the incident. The inquest report is marked as Exhibit P/6, and the arrest of the accused is recorded in the arrest panchnama, Exhibit P/7.

10. Rajneesh Kori (PW-6), brother of the deceased Reenu Kori, admitted in paragraph 3 of his cross-examination that the accused had demanded Rs. 50,000/- from his sister for purchase of a motorcycle. He further deposed that his sister Reenu had never disclosed this information to him, but had only communicated it to their uncle and aunt. He also stated that his sister was more educated than the accused, Om Prakash.

11. Nandlal Patel (PW-1) stated that on 20.04.2022, he was posted as Patwari of Patwari Halka Sahji, Tehsil Sihawal. On that date, as per the order of the Naib Tehsildar, Sihawal, he was directed to prepare a land map of the site related to Crime No. 100/22, registered at Police Station Amilia under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. In compliance with the order, he visited the

incident site at Village Sahji and prepared a site panchnama at the house located on part of Arazi No. 343, measuring 0.07 hectare, in the presence of witnesses. The site panchnama is marked as Ex.P-2. He also prepared a spot

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

7 CRA-6347-2023 map of the site, marked as Ex.P-3. On the same day, he submitted his report to the Naib Tehsildar, which is marked as Ex.P-1.

12. Dr. Swatantra Patel (PW-7) deposed that on 13.02.2022, he was posted as a Medical Officer at the Community Health Centre, Sihawal. He conducted the postmortem examination and stated that the deceased appeared to have died due to suffocation caused by ante-mortem hanging, as mentioned in the postmortem report, which was prepared within 24 hours of the examination. He further stated that the death appeared to be suicidal in nature. During cross-examination, he admitted that there were no external injuries on the body of the deceased.

13. Dinesh Rawat (PW-8) deposed that on 13.02.2022, as Constable at Police Station Amilia, he received the autopsy form of Reenu Kori from ASI Om Prakash Mishra and took the body to CHC Sihawal for post-mortem. The body was handed over to the husband, Om Prakash Kori, in the presence of witnesses (Exhibit P/10, duty certificate Exhibit P/12). On 14.02.2022, he brought a piece of nylon saree from CHC Sihawal, which was seized by Head Constable Pushpendra Singh (Exhibit P/13). On 29.03.2022, he produced the deceased's viscera, a saline bottle, and a sealed sample from CHC Sihawal, which were seized by the same officer in the presence of witnesses (Exhibit P/14)

14. Om Prakash (PW-9) stated that on 13.02.2022, he was posted as Assistant Sub-Inspector at Amilia Police Station. He deposed that on the same date, he went to the scene of the incident in connection with case No. 08/2022, dated 13.02.2022, under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

8 CRA-6347-2023 (IPC). He prepared a spot map based on the statements of the witnesses, which is marked as Exhibit P/8. He also issued a duty certificate to Constable Dinesh Rawat, which is marked as Exhibit P/12-A.

15. Pushpendra Singh (PW-10) was posted as Head Constable (Writer) at Amilia Police Station. He corroborated the statement made by Dinesh Rawat and stated that, based on information provided by Shankar Kori, he conducted the inquest for Case No. 8/2022. The Merg intimation is marked as Ex.P/6.

16. Ashutosh Dwivedi (PW-11), Sub-Divisional Officer, Churhat, stated that on 22.02.2022, in Case No. 8/22 (Amilia PS) regarding the death of newly married Smt. Reenu Kori, he issued Section 160 CrPC notices to inquest witnesses Triveni Kori, Meena Kori, and Rajneesh Kori and recorded their statements. After completing the inquest, he registered FIR No. 100/2022 (Exhibit P/15). On 10.03.2022, he reissued notices to the same witnesses for Crime No. 100/22 (Exhibit P/17) and recorded their statements. He arrested Omprakash Kori on 11.03.2022 and prepared the arrest panchnama (Exhibit P/7). The deceased's viscera was sent to FSL Sagar (Exhibit P/19). In cross-examination, he admitted not seizing the deceased's mobile, not obtaining call records, not collecting parents' call details, and not verifying contact on 12.02.2022..

17. In the present case, the mother of the deceased, Meena Kori (PW-2), admitted during her cross-examination that the accused never demanded any dowry from her. She also stated that her daughter never informed her about any pain, harassment, or ill-treatment by the accused. She further stated that

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

9 CRA-6347-2023 she does not know why her daughter Reenu committed suicide. The evidence shows that the deceased was a college student and used to attend college from her matrimonial home. The accused himself was bearing the expenses of her education.

18. Perusal of the cross-examination of the deceased's brother, Rajneesh (PW-6), and father, Triveni (PW-5), also reveals that the deceased never informed them about any demand for dowry by the accused. It is further clear from the prosecution's evidence that neither the deceased nor her parents or brother made any complaint or report during her lifetime regarding any alleged demand for dowry or harassment. There is also no evidence to show that any Panchayat or community meeting was convened concerning any alleged dowry demand or harassment by the accused. It is important to note that the parents of the deceased have admitted that all her educational expenses were borne by the accused. This fact indicates that there was no dowry demand, because if the accused had been demanding dowry, he would not have voluntarily paid for her education and would instead have required her to obtain those expenses from her parents. During the merg inquiry, the statements of the deceased's parents and brother were recorded on 22.02.2022, whereas the incident occurred on 13.02.2022. It is noteworthy that the merg was registered on 13.02.2022; however, the officer who conducted the inquiry has not provided any explanation for the delay in recording the statements of the deceased's parents and brother..

19. After examining the entire evidence on record, we find no error in the judgment of the trial Court to acquit the respondent/accused. Although the

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:14306

10 CRA-6347-2023 death was unnatural and within seven years of marriage but the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was subjected to dowry-related cruelty soon before her death. The parents and brother admitted that no dowry demand was made to them, no complaint or Panchayat was held, and the deceased never informed them of any harassment. There were material contradictions and delay in recording statements. Therefore, the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act does not apply. The prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

20. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the State fails and is hereby dismissed. The judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court is affirmed.

21. Record of the trial Court be sent back.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) (RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN) JUDGE JUDGE Rao