- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.09.2005 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Malda in Sessions Case No. 218/2002 (Sessions Trial No.17 of 2003) whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty for offences under Section 498(A)/302 of the Indian Panel Code and was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/ - and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 (six) more months for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Panel Code. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 (three) years with a fine of Rs.1,000/ - and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 (two) more months for the offence punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian Panel Code. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
(2.) Upon a perusal of the written report and the FIR, it is evident that Kaliachak P.S. Case No.107 dated 27.03.2002 under Sections 498(A)/302 was initiated on the basis of a written report of one Anjali Mondal, mother of the deceased Dhrita Mondal (Mousumi) against the appellant Haren Mondal. In the written report she alleged that her daughter aged about 20 (twenty) years was married to Haren Mondal on 04.09.2001 and at the time of marriage, she had paid Rs.50,000/ - for purchase of a motorcycle and a television set. She had also given 2.5 'bharies' of gold, a cot etc. as dowry. She alleged that after marriage, her daughter resided in the house of her husband but after about 2 (two) months from the marriage, her son -in -law started beating her daughter on lame excuses. This was informed by the daughter to her mother. Subsequently, the complainant came to learn from different sources that the character of her son - in -law Haren Mondal (appellant) was not good and in the past, he had a history of seducing another girl and then torturing her. It was further alleged that on 27.3.2002, at 5 P.M., one Atul Mandal of Village Fatepur came and told her and her son that their Jamai (appellant) had beaten her daughter to such an extent that she was "half dead". Subsequently, one Ranjit Mandal of their village informed her that her daughter Dhrita was lying dead and in a burnt condition in the house of her husband. Hearing such news she and her son Achintya Mandal and other villagers went to the house and found the daughter lying dead in a burnt condition and also noticed that the appellant had fled away from the house. According to the complainant the appellant had killed her daughter after setting her on fire. On receiving the petition of complaint, the Kaliachak Police Station registered the aforesaid case and took up investigation. On completion of the investigation, the police submitted a charge sheet under Sections 498(A)/302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. Thereafter the learned SDJM, Malda committed the case to the Court of Sessions whereafter charges were framed, explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter trial proceeded and subsequently the impugned judgement was passed.
(3.) We have given our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances involved in this case. Upon a perusal of the post mortem report we notice that the following injuries were found : - 1. Lacerated wound (ante mortem) - 1" X 1/4" - muscle deep at left cheek. 2. Lacerated wound (ante mortem) - " X 1/2" - skin deep on the anterior upper chest. 3. Haematoma - 2" X 1" on the anterior upper chest wall. 4. Second to fourth degree burns all over the body, which was blackened with superficial layer of skin lost at places. No blisters were found but there were signs of burning and singing of scalp hairs, eye brows, eye lashes, auxiliary and pubic hairs were burnt and they were post mortem in nature. The injuries further recorded that there was subcutaneous echymosis on the anterior portion of the neck, which was ante mortem in nature. The neck muscle was congested. Tracheal rings was crushed. The hyoid bone was fractured.;