Jai Prakash Pandey vs Prabhawati & Ors. on 14 October, 2015

1. The petitioner who is the informant of FIR No.212/2012 has
challenged the order dated 11.04.2013 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-West in Sessions Case
No.15/2013 whereby he has discharged respondent Nos.1 & 2 of the
offence under Section 498A/304B and 34 of the IPC and has framed
charges under the aforesaid sections only against the husband of the
deceased namely Nagmani @ Montu. The respondents Nos.1 & 2 are
the mother-in-law and married sister-in-law of the deceased.
2. The First Information Report was lodged on 19.08.2012 by the
petitioner alleging that he married his daughter Neha to co-accused
Nagmani on 21.05.2011 in accordance with Hindu religious rites. At

Crl.Rev P No.710/2013 Page 1 of 17
the time of marriage, Nagmani, the husband, was in employment in
Delhi and, therefore, immediately after the marriage, the daughter of
the informant came to stay with her husband in Delhi where the
couple resided in a rented accommodation. It has been averred in the
First Information Report that sometimes in January, 2012 his daughter
was insinuated and troubled at the instance of the respondents and her
husband for bringing insufficient dowry. The daughter of the
informant thereafter came to her parental home and joined her
husband later on the husband apologizing for his conduct. Again, a
complaint was made by his daughter in the month of July, 2012 about
similar bad behavior by her husband. The daughter of the petitioner
told him that she always feared the arrival of her husband in the night.
The husband of the deceased again promised of good conduct and
took his wife to his home. The bad behaviour continued unabated. On
18.08.2012 at about mid-day, the petitioner is said to have talked to
his daughter on telephone when the petitioner made it known that he
wished to visit her. The daughter of the informant prevented him from
visiting her and said that she should be left to her own fate. At about
8.30 pm on the same day a neighbour of the in-laws of the daughter of
the petitioner gave an information on telephone that his daughter had
committed suicide. On such information, the informant/petitioner and
his family members left for the matrimonial home of the deceased
from Sangam Vihar. The informant found that the husband of the
deceased had already taken her to Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital.
This incensed the informant and, therefore, it was alleged by the

Crl.Rev P No.710/2013 Page 2 of 17
petitioner that because of the ill treatment meted out to the deceased,
she committed suicide.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*