- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 3rd December, 2005 passed by the Ld. 1st Additional Sessions Court, Murshidabad in Sessions Serial No. 418/2004 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 3/January, 2005 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to suffer rigourous imprisonment of 2 months.
(2.) The facts are as follows:- a) Information was received at Daulatabad P.S., Dist,- Murshidabad on the 15th of March, 2003 of a homicidal death of the daughter of the complainant one, Sahamad Ali on the night between 14th & 15th of March, 2003. The original written complaint was treated as a FIR registered as FIR No. 26/2003 and one, S.I. Tanmoy Bose was directed to take up investigation for offences alleged under Section 302/201 of the IPC. The present accused/appellant, Jamiruddin Sk. was arraigned as the sole accused. b) According to the complaint, the deceased, one Sarifa, who was the daughter of the complainant, had a love affair with the accused who also belonged to the same village of Gurudaspur, Paschimpara under Daulatabad P.S., Dist.- Murshidabad. Out of the love affair his daughter married the accused and three months prior to the lodging of the complaint she came to her paternal house complaining of ill-treatment at her matrimonial house. c) Being a poor person the complainant could not afford anything to be given to the bridegroom during marriage and as a consequence Sarifa was subjected to torture as aforementioned. She was pressurised to bring a sum of Rs. 10,000/- from her father and given meal for half a day only. Furthermore, Sarifa was pregnant at the time she arrived at her paternal home. d) It is further alleged that the accused, her husband, on the 14th of March, 2003 came to the matrimonial home where his wife, Sarifa was staying and had his meal there. After the meal the daughter and her husband retired to a portion of the house for rest. In the other sleeping area of the house the complainant slept with his wife. The complaint alleges that waking up in the morning on the 15th of March, 2003 they found the accused missing from the side of their daughter and also missing from the house. The wife of the complainant, one Noor Jahan Bibi went to wake up their daughter, Sarifa from her bed and, or not getting any response for a long time came close to the daughter and touched her body. In spite of touching Sarifa she did not respond from the bed and Noor Jahan Bibi found the body to be cool whereupon she suspected something foul had happened and started shouting. e) At the material point of time the complainant had left early in the morning to work in his fields. He was informed by his nephew, one Noor Tajul that his daughter, Sarifa was dead. On hearing such news the complainant rushed to his house and found the body of Sarifa lying on the bed with her head turned upwards. On examining the body he found bruises on the neck and the tongue was pressed by the teeth. The complainant also found a blue coloured glass poison like substance pouring out of the mouth of the dead body. f) In view of the above noted facts and circumstances the complainant alleges that the accused had killed his daughter by strangulation. He further alleges that the accused fled by pouring some poison like substance into the mouth of Sarifa in order to hide the evidence of death by strangulation. He prayed for a thorough investigation into the unnatural death of his daughter. g) Pursuant to the FIR the police held inquest over the body of Sarifa. From the inquest report mark Exbt. 6 at the trial the body was found lying on a mat in a room and ligature mark was found on the neck which stretched from the left side of the throat to the neck. Bruises were also seen on the neck just below the right ear showing evidence of pressure applied. Foam was found to be coming out from the nose of the deceased. No other injuries were found on the body. h) The Investigating Officer (IO) prepared a rough sketch map of the P.O. From the rough sketch map it transpires that the P.O. is a part of the house of the complainant and, on three sides of the said house there lie cultivable fields. The post mortem (for short PM report) mark Exbt. 2 in the trial concludes that death was homicidal and ante mortem in nature caused by strangulation. Ligature marks are found in the lower part of the neck and the victim was pregnant by about 28 weeks at the time of her death. i) The accused was examined under Section 313 CrPC and his version is one of denial. To a specific question put to him by the Ld. Trial Court whether he had anything to state on the allegation that Sarifa was brought to her paternal home by her father due to heavy torture, the accused replied as follows:- "She was taken." To another question whether the accused was invited to dinner at the house of the in-laws on the date of occurrence the appellant has answered in the positive with the words "Yes, Sir". To a third question whether the accused accepted that he wanted to stay back at the house of his in-laws after the dinner, the appellant had answered in the negative with the words "No, Sir".
(3.) PW1 is the complainant himself, Sahamad Ali. In his evidence he has reiterated the contents of the complaint. He has stated that the accused who was also his 'Jamai' had his house at a distance of two kms. from the house of the complainant. On the date of the occurrence the accused had expressed the desire to spend the night in the house of his in-laws. It is further stated by PW1 that he has two rooms in his house, out of which one room was lying vacant. On the fateful night his daughter and the accused occupied the vacant room.;