- (1.) The appeal by the two appellants before us questions the correctness and legality of the impugned judgment dated 23.05.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Maharajganj convicting and sentencing the appellants for having committed the offences under Section 304-B I.P.C. with life imprisonment, under Section 498-A I.P.C. for two years Rigorous Imprisonment and Rs.5,000/- each as fine. They have also been convicted under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for 1 year Rigorous Imprisonment coupled with a fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine both the appellants are to undergo six months' imprisonment additionally. All the sentences are to run concurrently.
(2.) The appellant no.1 Satish Kumar @ Pintu is still in jail whereas the second appellant namely, Bhanmati who is stated to be more than eighty years of age, is on bail.
(3.) The prosecution has brought on record the information tendered by the appellant Satish Kumar @ Pintu about the incident having taken place on 14.07.2007 between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. This narration was made and entered the next day in the General Diary as report no.9 on 15.07.2007 at 6.50 a.m. The distance of the police station concerned namely, Purandarpur, district Mahrajganj is one and half kilometers from the place of occurrence namely, village Soharwaliya Khurd. This entry of the General Diary has been proved by PW-7 Moti Prasad, the Constable on duty who has made the aforesaid entry. The narration of this entry is available on the lower court record and has been categorically extracted in the second paragraph of the impugned judgment.;