The court emphasized the importance of eyewitness testimony and rejected the argument of lack of motive for the murder in upholding the conviction under Section 302 of the IPC.

Headnote:
Dowry Harassment - Criminal Law - IPC Sections 302, 498A - Summary: The court discussed the evidence related to the demand of dowry and found the prosecution's case unsatisfactory for Section 498A. However, the court upheld the conviction under Section 302 based on the eyewitness account and rejected the argument of lack of motive for the murder.
Fact of the Case:

The appellant was found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498A of the IPC for causing the death of his wife due to dowry harassment.
Finding of the Court:

The court found the appellant guilty under Section 302 but acquitted him of the charge under Section 498A due to unsatisfactory evidence of dowry harassment.
Issues: The primary issue was the validity of the charges under Sections 302 and 498A of the IPC based on the evidence of dowry harassment and the motive for the murder.
Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the conviction under Section 302 based on the eyewitness account and rejected the argument of lack of motive for the murder.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, acquitting the appellant of the charge under Section 498A and dismissing the appeal in respect of the finding of guilt and conviction under Section 302.

JUDGMENT

1. This jail appeal has been filed by Bhura Ram S/o Surta Ram 'Kumhar' resident of Village Sankada against the judgment dated 8.6.2000 by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer whereby the appellant has been found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498A of the IPC. His father Surta Ram was a co-accused and was tried for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 109 and 498A of the IPC who has been acquitted by the learned trial court of both the charges.

2. PW4 Anoparam S/o Kanaram 'Kumhar resident of Pokaran on 21.10.98 at 8 p.m. lodged a written report Ex.P/4 before PW10 Chokha Ram (SHO Police Station Sankada) at Government Hospital Pokaran and on its basis a case under Section 302, 304B and 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC s was registered at police station Sankada.

3. According to the FIR Ex.P/4 the complainant Anoparam had two daughters, Gempu (a) Laxmi (deceased) and Smt. Maggi (PW15), who were married some six months back to two brothers Bhura Ram (appellant) and Khima Ram respectively. According to the report Ex.P/4, after marriage the two sisters started to live at their inlaws' place in village Sankada and right from the beginning both were being harassed by the two accused persons who were father and son, in connection with demand of dowry. It was alleged that many a times the deceased Gempu was given severe beating in connection with the said demand. Around 15 17.10.98 Anoparam had gone to the house of the accused persons where both the girls complained to their father that they were being harassed by Bhura Ram and Surta Ram in connection with demand of dowry and at times no food was served to them and they were regularly belaboured and the deceased Gempu further conveyed that she was likely to be murdered 20 by the accused persons. Anoparam offered to take them back to his house but the accused persons refused the permission and said that he could take them with him after Diwali. Further it was stated that Anoparam, with his wife (PW-16 Smt. Mangi), had gone to Phalodi where he received a message on telephone to the effect that Gempu had been murdered. He rushed back to Pokaran where his daughter PW-15 Maggi narrated that at about 4 p.m. on that day when the deceased Gempu was cleaning the utensils and Maggi was sweeping the house, the accused Surta Ram instigated his son Bhura Ram to murder the deceased and on accunt of this instigation the appellant Bhura Ram inflicted a number of injuries to the deceased by a 'Kulhadr, as a result of which the deceased Smt. Gempu was fatally wounded. According to the report Khemaram, Chandararn and Smt. Maggi took the injured Smt. Gempu to the hospital at Pokaran but she breathed her last in between and died before reaching the hospital. Anoparam in this way received the details from his daughter PW-15 Maggi and lodged the report to Chokha Ram SHO, Police Station Sankada, who had reached the hospital at Pokaran after receiving a wireless message at police station Sankada. After the investigation was over, both the said accused persons were challaned and charges were framed against both as stated in the beginning. Both pleaded not guilty. 18 witnesses 40 were examined by the prosecution and DW1 Chanana Ram and DW-2 Nakhata Ram were examined in defence. The accused persons in their statements recorded under Section 313 of the IPC stated that none of them was present in the house at the relevant time and they had been implicated falsely. PW-Chanana Ram and DW-2 Nakhata Ram have both deposed to 45 the effect that the two accused persons were not present in the house when the incident took place. According to these witnesses the deceased was very quarrelsome and used to pick up quarrel with the neighbours. Argument were then heard by the learned trial court and the judgment was delivered on 8.6.2000. The accused Surta Ram was acquitted and the appellant Bhura Ram was found guilty. For the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC li

Click Here to Read the rest of this document