GULAB CHAND MEHTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the five appellants have been convicted under Sections 304A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under both counts. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that the sister of the first informant, Sunil Kumar Singh (P.W. 9), aged about 20 years was married with appellant, Gulab Chand Mehta, two years prior to the date of institution of the case. It has been alleged that on the occasion of the marriage he had given a sum of Rs. 25,000/- and other golden and silver ornaments to the appellant-Gulab Chand Mehta but he had demanded a Rajdoot motor cycle at the time of marriage. It has been further alleged that appellant-Gulab Chand Mehta demanded the motor cycle on being persuaded by the other appellants. The father of the first informant had agreed to give the motor cycle to the appellant but due to some inability the demand of motor cycle made by appellant Gulab Chand Mehta could not be fulfilled. It has been further alleged that two months prior to the date of lodging of the F.I.R. the second marriage (Gauna) of the sister of the informant was performed and his sister had gone to her in-laws house in village Talha along with her husband. It has been further alleged that the informant and his two cousins and two sons of his Foofa had also gone to village Talha Rahi with his sister. On that very night the appellants subjected her to ill-treatment due to non-fulfilment of the demand of dowry in the shape of motor cycle. His sister kept weeping for the whole night and she did not take her meal and the next morning Renu Devi asked the informant and others to go back to her father with a request to fulfil the demand of the appellants. Due to poverty the informant started managing the amount for the purchase of a motor cycle by selling his cattle but all of a sudden in the night of 18.5.1996 at about 8 or 9 p.m. appellant-Laxman Mehta, Savitri Devi, Gulab Chand Mehta, Nirmala Devi and Anirudh Mehta assaulted the victim girl, Renu Devi, by means "Cholani" and "Pidhiya", fists and kicks taking the plea that she had not cooked the meal and after the alleged assault they removed her from the house in unconscious condition with a view to kill her. It has been further alleged that the informant got such information on 25.5.1996 by one person of village Talha Rahi. Hearing such information, the informant along with some of his villagers visited the house of his sister's in-laws in the evening of 25.5.1996 but none of the persons were present in the house and he could not see his sister, Renu Devi, in the house. Then he made hectic search of his sister and then in the evening of 30.5.1996 he visited the Chousa police station to lodge the information but the Officer-in-charge was not present in the police station. On 31.5.1996 he lodged the written report in the Chousa police station alleging therein the aforesaid facts. On the basis of the written report of the first informant (Ext. 1) a formal F.I.R was drawn up and after completion of investigation the police submitted by charge-sheet, Thereafter cognizance was taken and the trial concluded with the result as stated above.

(3.) The case of the defence is that Renu Devi had died a natural death and the informants had been informed about the death of Renu Devi and the informant and several villagers had participated in the Saradh ceremony of Renu Devi and the father of the informant has also participated in the Saradh. However, he wanted to get back the ornaments of Renu Devi and in order to pressurise the appellants the informant, his father and his cousin conspired together and falsely implicated the appellants.