Criminal Revision No. 1101/2016. Case: Swaraj and Ors. Vs State of Madhya Pradesh. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (India)

Case NumberCriminal Revision No. 1101/2016
CounselFor Appellant: R.S. Patel, Counsel and For Respondents: S.P. Chadar, Panel Lawyer
JudgesC.V. Sirpurkar, J.
IssueCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Sections 164, 173(2); Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3, 4; Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32(1); Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 302, 304B, 306, 34, 498A
Judgement DateFebruary 06, 2017
CourtHigh Court of Madhya Pradesh (India)


C.V. Sirpurkar, J.

  1. This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 29.02.2016 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jatara, District Tikamgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 266/2015, whereby a charge under section 302 read with section 34, 304-B, 306 & 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was framed against the petitioners Swaraj and Rajpal Singh Bundela.

  2. As per prosecution case before the trial Court deceased Renuka Raje married co-accused Yatendra Singh on 07.12.2008. Swaraj is the mother and Rajpal Singh is the father of Yatendra Singh. At the time of marriage, parents of deceased Renuka Raje had given Rs. 5,00,000/- in cash and other household items in dowry; however, petitioner Swaraj used to complain that they did not receive dowry to the extent they expected. The chain given in dowry was light. When deceased Renuka became pregnant, she was left at her maternal home and petitioners and co-accused Yatendra did not pay any attention to her. The delivery required an operation. At that time, the consent of Yatendra Singh was needed. He arrived with his mother after several calls. When petitioner Swaraj returned, she took away all the gold and silver ornaments of Renuka Raje. After the delivery, Renuka Raje continued to be in her maternal home for about 6 months. When deceased Renuka asked Yatendra Singh to take her back, he put up a condition that till two of the shops belonging to Renuka's father were not transferred in his name, he would not keep Renuka with him and she will have to live with his parents at Chandera. Thereafter, deceased Renuka was sent to Chandera by her parents with the provisions. The parents of the deceased used to make arrangements for all the provisions at Chandera. At the time of "Karva Chauth", Yatendra Singh went to Chandera. After about a fortnight, on 26.10.2014, Lata Raje, mother of the deceased, received a telephone call from some unknown lady that Renuka Raje was ill and was frothing from mouth. She was taken to Jhansi. The relatives of the deceased reached Jhansi Medical College but by then, the deceased had already expired. The relatives of the deceased suspected that she was harassed and killed by the accused persons for dowry.

  3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the order framing charge against petitioners Swaraj and Rajpal Singh mainly on the ground that there are no specific allegations of dowry demand and harassment against the petitioners. In panchnama of the dead body, no external injury was found on the person of the deceased. No external injury was found on the dead body during autopsy either. The doctor conducting post-mortem examination failed to determine the cause of death; therefore, viscera was preserved and sent for chemical examination to the Medico Legal Institute, Bhopal and Forensic Science...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT