TURAWALI ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have preferred this appeal against the Judgment dated 31.5.2001 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in S.T. No. 234 of 1992/ 33 of 2001 whereby both the appellants are convicted under Section 306/34 I.P.C and sentenced to undergo R.I.for a period of five years and pay a fine a rupees 5000/ -each and if both the convicts will not pay the amount as awarded then they will have to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and it will run consecutively.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution as it appears from the fardbeyan of the informant in brief is that sister of the informant was married in the year 1985 with Md.Taib Ansari (son of the appellant). After two years of marriage accused appellants who are father -in -law and mother -in -law, started torturing his sister and told her that her parents have not given sufficient dowry and further directed her to bring further a sum of rupees 5000/ -from her father. When his sister came to her Naihar then told the informant regarding ill treatment of accused appellants upon her. It is further alleged that the appellants tried to settle second marriage of their son in village Kharpokhar. As soon as the informant came to know about this, he reported this matter to the Anjuman Committee and the Anjuman Committee stop the second marriage of the son of the accused appellants. His sister gave birth to a female child thereafter when she went to her Sasural, her husband went to Bombay for doing job but left the informants sister in the village in the custody of both the accused persons. It is further alleged as both the accused persons again started torturing her, she became frustrated and on 16.7.91 consumed poison. Amrit Mahato of village Fatepur on 17.7.91 informed the informant regarding this incident. The informant along with his family members went to her sisters house and found she was senseless and lying in a cot. They immediately took her and rushed to the Hospital for her treatment but on the way she died. On the basis of this information, a case has been registered against both the appellants under Section 306/34 I.P.C. After completion of investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet against the both the appellants under Section 306/34 I.P.C.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant submits that both the appellants are old persons. The appellant No.1 is now aged about 78 years and appellant No.2 is 73 years and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that in view of the post mortem report the appellants can not be convicted under Section 306 I.P.C. at all.