SK BASIR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though all appellants suffered conviction under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), while appellant Sk. Basir, Bk. Shahid, Sk. Afi and Sk. Jamil Ahmad were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life, Mariyam Khatoon and Hasina Khatoon , being female members and also in view of their age, were sentenced by the trial Court to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years only. All the appellants were also convicted under Section 201, IPC for which they were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years, with a rider that all the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) Allegedly, after Shiba Khatoon was married to Basir Ahmad, her happiness was short-lived, as in-laws became hostile to her for failure of her parents to make provision of sufficient dowry to them. Harassment and torture continued to be meted out to her, as her parents could not make provision of Rs. 40,000/- for construction of a house, and eventually, information about tragic end of Shiba Khatoon was received by the parents, pursuant to which her dead body in a gunny bag floating in a local river was noticed. After a Police case had been instituted, investigation followed, evidences were collected, inquest report over the dead body of the deceased was prepared by the Police Officer and post mortem was conducted by the doctor, and on conclusion of investigation, Police laid charge sheet before the Court.

(3.) Quite a good number of witnesses were examined by the State to establish guilt attributed to the appellants about death of Shiba Khatoon due to infliction of harassment and torture on her allegedly for failure of the parents to make provision of Rs. 40,000/- for construction of house to the in-laws. The defence too examined three witnesses, who stated, inter alia that 4/5 months, preceding the incident, pursuant to a Panchayati convened in the village, Shiba Khatoon was divorced by her husband, and on these premises, defence of the appellants was that in no way appellants were answerable for killing of the deceased and circumstances too were not formidable to bring the offence within mischief of Section 304-B, IPC. Trial Court, however, on evaluation of probative value of the testimony of the witnesses, while rejected the defence version, recorded finding of guilt and sentenced appellants in the matter stated above.