Girish Chandra Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against a judgment dated 7th June, 2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 12th Court, 24- Parganas (South), Alipore in Sessions Trial No. 6(6)97 (State v. Ashoke Singh & Anr.) by which both the accused persons were convicted for offences punishable under sections 498A/306 of the Indian Penal Code. By an order dated 8th June, 2001 both the convicts were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months each for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. They were also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were however, directed to run concurrently.
(2.) THE facts and circumstances of the case briefly stated are as follows: On 6th October, 1994 at 12 hours Tapasi was hospitalized, with burn injuries, by Bibhuti (P.W. 6) a relation of her husband. She died on 7th October, 1994. THE records of the hospital contained two stories as regards the cause of the injury. (a) THEre is a statement purporting to have been made by the, patient that she poured kerosene oil on her body and ignited herself by throwing a match stick. (b) THEre is another statement of the patient as regards the cause of injury, purporting to have been recorded by the attending doctor wherein it is stated that wife she was cooking food, her sari caught fire. The husband and the mother-in-law, the two accused persons in this case were found taking care of the victim. There was no attempt on their part to escape or run away. On 7th October, 1994, a written complaint was lodged by the father of the deceased alleging that soon after the marriage the victim used to be assaulted by the accused persons. It is also alleged that there was a demand for dowry which was allegedly met by paying a sum of Rs. 5,000/- by the elder sister of the deceased. But the torture allegedly continued unabated. Ultimately the victim ended her life by setting herself on fire. It is alleged that the victim was compelled to commit suicide due to continuous torture inflicted by the accused persons. The learned trial Court appears to have been convinced with the case of the prosecution and recorded the following findings : ".....This also leads us to the conclusion that burning of Tapasi was not accidental one but suicidal. Now from the facts and circumstances and materials on record and other surrounding circumstances it appears that Tapasi was subjected to inhuman physical and mental torture by the accused persons and she committed suicide by setting fire on herself to escape from that torture and both the accused persons abetted commission of suicide by Tapasi..........."
(3.) THE reasons advanced by the learned trial Court in support of the aforesaid finding, to be precise, are as follows : ".............We also find that the P.W.s 1 and 2 who happen to be the father and brother of Tapasi only visited her matrimonial home once. THEy heard about the torture upon Tapasi from Arati. P.W. 4 also stated that he also heard about the torture upon Tapasi from his wife i.e. P.W. 3 and hence we find that P.W. 3 is the pivot of this case. P.W. 3 has categorically stated that Tapasi was subjected to torture by the accused persons: THE accused Ashoke Singh in his examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. also stated inter alia his father-in-law and brother-in-law i.e. P.W.s 1 and 2 did not visit their house but P.W. 3 Arati Kundu at times used to visit them. So, I again say that Arati Kundu (P.W. 3) was found to be in touch with Tapasi all along. Her statement as to torture has almost remained unassailed. Again we find that inspite of such relation with Tapasi P.W. 3 was not informed at the time and place of delivery when Tapasi needed her assistance; more. It is to be stated that she was not only the sister but more than that who brought her (Tapasi) up since the age of 3 years and gave her in marriage and looked after her. THE learned defence Lawyer has stated that as a close relative she might be an interested witness. But it is to be stated that being such a close relative she had the opportunity to know the life history of Tapasi. I would admit that there might be tendency of exaggeration and evidence of such a person is required to be scan with great caution but that does not mean that even the more truthful and honest versions are to be thrown aside. Again we find that she (P.W. 3) was not present at the first eating rice ceremony of Tapasi's daughter which is not accepted. Such situations go to show that the accused persons always did not maintain good relations even with Arati and her family. THEse circumstances also speak in favour of torture............" Mr. Mitra, learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal submitted that there is practically no evidence to support the allegation that the alleged suicide was abetted by the accused persons or any one of them. He also contended, that there is no evidence to satisfactorily establish that any ill treatment was ever meted out by the husband or the mother-in-law to the deceased. According to him, the alleged demand for dowry is a myth which has been introduced with an ulterior purpose of procuring conviction for a wrong which was never committed by any of the accused persons. He invited up to consider the question in the light of the statement made by the victim herself to the attending physician which was recorded by the attending physician in the bed-head ticket itself in the usual course of his business which reads as follows :- As stated by the patient that while she was cooking her shari caught fire, cold water applied to extinguish the fire and she was taken immediately to S.S.K.M. Hospital....";