RASH BIHARI PAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By Court, This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7.9.2002and order of conviction dated 9.9.2002 passed by Sri Surendra Nath Pandkey, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Sessions Case No. 178/ 2000/Sessions Case No. 258/2001 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has found the appellant, Rash Bihari Pal husband of the deceased, Rita Pal guilty under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 8 years, while by the said judgment he acquitted the other accused persons, namely, Triveni Pal, Paruli Dasi, Dasu Pal and Sadhan Pal. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no direct evidence against the appellant that he used to torture the victim girl and as such the conviction of the appellant under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code is bad in law and he should have been given benefit of doubt along with other accused persons whose cases were similar to that of other accused persons and as such the appellant should be given benefit of doubt and acquitted from the charges. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that there is sufficient evidence to prove that the victim girl used to be tortured for non-fulfillment of the dowry and after putting the victim on fire the husband and his family members fled away from the house and the trial court rightly convicted the appellant, who is the prime accused since he demanded dowry.

(2.) After hearing both the parties and going through the record, I find that the prosecution was started on the basis of the fardbeyan-2- given by P.W.6, Anil Kumar Chandra father of the victim girl stating therein that his daughter, Rita Pal aged about 20 years was married with the appellant, Rash Bihari Pal son of Tribeni Pal about three years ago and he had given Rs. 45,000/- in marriage along with gold ornaments and utensils. After marriage his daughter was living in her sasural. In the beginning they kept her properly, but after sometime the boy started demanding money and T.V. He stated that he had given dowry as per his capacity, but in spite of that they used to torture and used to ask her to give more money and T.V. Thin formant went to her sasural and asked them not to torture his daughter. It is further alleged that on 10.9.99 at about 12 P.M. in the afternoon, Nemai Paul and Uttam came to his house and informed him that his daughter is seriously ill.

(3.) Then, he hired a taxi and went to his daughter's caesural along with others and found her body was lying in the house alone, in a burnt condition and ail the inmates fled away. Then, he made an inquiry and came to know that the appellant and his family members after burning his daughter, they fled away, due to non-fulfillment of dowry. On the basis of the said fare beat the police registered a case under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation police submitted charge-sheet in the case. Since the case was exclusively tribal by a Court of Sessions the learned Magistrate after taking cognizance of the case committed the same to the court of sessions. Lastly the case was finally heard and disposed of by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge as stated above. It appears that in course of trial the prosecution has examined9 witnesses. P.W.1, Rampada Bhandary, P.W.2, Shabbir Sheikh,P.W.3, Rishi Kumar, P.W.4, Swadhin Chandra Pal, P.W.5, Judhistir Kumar, P.W.6, Anil Kumar Chandra, P.W.7, Surya Narayan Pal, P.W.8, Madan Chandra Pal and P.W.9, Dr. Ranjan Sinha, who proved the postmortem report. It is important to note that P.W.1, Rampada Bhandary, P.W.7,Surya Narayan Pal and P.W.8, Madan Chandra Pal, have turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. P.W.2, Shabbir Sheikh is only a driver, who stated that on the date of occurrence his taxi was hired by the informant and he had also gone with them to the house of the sacral of the deceased and saw the dead body.-3-The prosecution case has been supported by the evidence of the informant (P.W.6) as well P.Ws. 3, 4 and 5.