The burden of proof under Section 106 of Indian Evidence Act and the principles of proper sentencing and the reformative approach underlying in the criminal justice system were the main legal points established in the judgment.

JUDGMENT :

Ajai Tyagi, J.

1. The appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Manoj Sharma against the judgment and order dated 30.06.2015, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hapur in Session Trail No. 1534 of 2012 (State of UP vs. Manoj Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 157 of 2012, under Sections 498A, 302, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur whereby the appellant is convicted and sentenced for the offence under Sections 302 & 304-B I.P.C. for life imprisonment with a fine and in default of payment of fine.

2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that a written report was submitted by informant-Mohan Sharma at police station Hapur Dehat, District Hapur with the averments that marriage of his daughter Anshu Sharma was solemnized with the accused-Manoj Sharma on 01.03.2009 in Hapur. After the marriage, husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law of deceased Anshu Sharma have started the demand of additional dowry and they used to demand of one Alto car and Rs.2 lacs in cash as demand of additional dowry. The financial position of informant was not such as to meet out the aforesaid demand, therefore, all the aforesaid persons started cruelty and torturing to his daughter. On 20.03.2012 at about 02:46 PM, his daughter made a phone call to the informant and told that due to non fulfilment of demand of additional dowry, her husband and his family members beating her.

3. It is also averred in the written report that informant and his wife went to the matrimonial home of their daughter, where they saw that dead body of their daughter was lying in the courtyard of the house and there were injuries mark on her body. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, a case crime no.157 of 2012 was registered at police station Hapur Dehat under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Investigating Officer took up the investigation, he visited the spot and prepared the site plan. Inquest proceedings were started and inquest report was prepared. Dead body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem where the doctor conducted the post-mortem on her body and prepared the post-mortem report.

4. During the course of investigation, Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons namely, Rajkumar, Smt. Priyanka, Km. Pooja, Manoj Sharma, Ashok Kumar and Smt. Anita.

5. Learned trial court took the cognizance on charge sheet. The matter being exclusively triable by the court of sessions, which was committed to the court of sessions where learned Trial Judge framed the charges against the accused persons under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302/34 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. During the couse of trial, accused-Ashok Kumar has passed away and rest of the accused perosns were put on trial. Accused-appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

6. To bring home the charges, the prosecution examined following witnesses:

7. In support of oral evidence, prosecution submitted following documentary evidence, which was proved by leading oral evidence:-

8. After completion of prosecution evidence, the statement of accused was recorded under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.