IMPORTANT POINT
A conviction under IPC Sections 498-A and 304-B requires clear evidence of a direct link between cruelty and the death, which was not proven in this case.

JUDGMENT :

In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 29.11.2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Achalpur, whereby the learned Judge convicted the accused of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of the IPC.

02] BACKGROUND FACTS:

PW-2 Rekha Yuvraj Khade is the informant. The crime was registered on her report dated 1st August, 2013 with Paratwada Police Station. The prosecution case, which can be gathered from the report and the material placed on record, is that deceased Pooja was her daughter. The marriage between Pooja and accused No.1 was solemnized on 10th February, 2011. Deceased Pooja, after marriage, went to her matrimonial house at Deomali, Taluka Achalpur, District Amravati. It is further case of prosecution that, for the initial 4-5 months, she was treated properly; however, later on, her husband and brother-in-law made a demand of Rs.50,000/- from the mother of the deceased as a dowry. The mother and her maternal grandfather could not pay the amount, and therefore she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty. Accused No.1 used to beat her. In the year 2013, after the birth of the daughter, when deceased Pooja went to the house of the accused, she was again ill-treated on account of the failure of her mother and maternal grandfather to pay the amount. The meeting was held amongst the relatives at the house of the accused. The efforts were made to save the marriage. The accused demanded Rs.50,000/- and told the mother that the deceased would be taken back only after the payment of Rs.50,000/-. The informant, her brother, and her father became ready to pay the amount to save the marriage. They told the accused that, after the sale of their soybean crop at the time of Diwali, they would pay the amount. However, there was no change in the attitude of the accused. They continued to ill-treat Pooja.

03] On 1st August, 2013 at about 10:00 a.m., the brother of the informant received a phone call from one Iqbal. Iqbal had made a phone call from a Government Hospital. He informed him that a dead girl from their family, with burn injuries, was brought to the hospital. The brother of the informant, the informant, and other family members went to the Rural Sub District Hospital, Achalpur, at about 11:30 a.m. They saw the dead body of Pooja. She had sustained burn injuries. The accused persons were not present in the hospital. The informant, therefore, went to the police station and lodged the report. On the basis of the report, a Crime bearing No.194/2013 was registered against the accused. The investigation in the crime was carried out by PW-8. He arrested the accused. He drew the spot panchanama. He collected the samples. He obtained the postmortem report. On completion of the investigation, he filed the charge-sheet against four accused persons.

04] Learned Additional Sessions Judge framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty. It is their defence that due to the death of their daughter on account of the burn injuries sustained by her, they have been falsely implicated. The prosecution, in order to bring home the guilt of the accused, examined 11 witnesses. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, on consideration of the evidence, held accused Nos.1 and 2 (appellants) guilty and sentenced them as above. Learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted accused Nos.3 and 4, namely the brother-in-law of the deceased and the mother-in-law of t