http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.)  938-939 of 1998

PETITIONER: STATE OF ORISSA                              

RESPONDENT: NIRANJAN MOHAPATRA & ORS.                   

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/02/2005

BENCH: B.P. SINGH & B.N. SRIKRISHNA

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

B.P.Singh,J.                   We have heard counsel for the parties.         This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court of Orissa,  Cuttack in Criminal Appeal Nos.149 and 221 of 1994 dated 24th September, 1997.  The High  Court by its impugned judgment and order allowed both the appeals and acquitted the  respondents of all the charges levelled against them.  Earlier, the appellants had been conv icted  by the trial court under Sections 498A and 304B IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous  imprisonment for two years under Section 498A and 7 years under Section 304B IPC.  However,  the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.221/1994 who are respondent 3 and 4 before us were  released on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.  As earlier noticed , the  High Court by its impugned judgment and order has acquitted all of them of the charges level led  against them.           We have heard counsel for the parties and we have also perused the records placed  before us.  We find ourselves in agreement with the High Court that so far as the allegation s  relating to the offence under Section 498A is concerned, the prosecution has not been able t o  establish its case against the respondents.  The High Court has considered the evidence on r ecord  and we find no reason to interfere with the finding of fact recorded by the High Court.  So  far as  the offence under Section 304B is concerned, there is no evidence to suggest that soon  befo re the  occurrence the deceased was subjected to torture and harassment.  In the absence of any such   evidence, conviction   under Section 304B cannot be sustained.  Even the medical evidence on   record is rather ambiguous.         We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the High Court has recorded the  order of acquittal based on the evidence on record and on proper appreciation of such eviden ce.   We, therefore, find no merit in the appeals and the same are accordingly dismissed.                    

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2