JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J. - (1.) THE appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 22nd/23rd December, 2009 passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court -11, Uluberia, Howrah convicting the appellants for commission of offence punishable under Section 304B/498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing appellant no.1 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of a sum of Rs.500/ -in default to suffer simple imprisonment of 1 month under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and other appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years for the offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/ -in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month for the offence punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, both the sentences to run concurrently. Prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellants is as follows: One Neoti Maity(PW1) lodged complaint before Shyampur Police Station alleging that his daughter, Pratima, the victim herein, was married to appellant no.1 two years ago. After 6 months of marriage the appellants being the husband, father in law, mother in law and brother in law of the victim subjected her to mental and physical torture on further demands of dowry to the tune of Rs.20,000/ -. Her daughter complained of such torture to her and she left her daughter at her matrimonial home requesting the appellants not to torture her. On 28.07.2007 at about 11 p.m she got information from a person that her daughter was ill and she and her family members rushed to the matrimonial home of her daughter and came to know that her daughter had been assaulted on that night by the appellants and the latter after killing her daughter had hanged her. On the basis of her complaint, Shyampur Police Station case no.115, dated 29/07/2007 under sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal code was registered against the appellants. In conclusion of investigation, charge sheet under sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code was filed against the appellants.
(2.) THE case, being a sessions triable one, was committed to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Uluberia, Howrah and transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, First Track Court -11 Uluberia, Howrah for trial and disposal. Charges were framed under Section498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants. The appellants pleaded ''not guilty '' and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the appellants was one of innocence and false implication. It was the specific defence of the appellants that victim was suffering from depression due to various ailments like asthma and gynaecological problems and resultantly she committed suicide. Defence examined 6 witnesses including appellant no.1 and exhibited a prescription of one Dipak Guria, exhibit A in support of its plea.
(3.) IN conclusion of trial, the trial Court by judgment and order dated 22nd/23rd December, 2009 convicted the appellants for commission of offence punishable under section 304B/498A/34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced appellant no.1 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment of 2 years and to pay a fine of sum of Rs.500/ -in default to suffer simple imprisonment of 1 month under section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and other appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years for the offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/ -, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 1 month for the offence punishable under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, both the sentences to run concurrently. Let me examine the evidence led by the parties in the instant case. PW1, Neoti Maity, is the mother of the victim and first informant in the instant case. She stated that the victim was married to appellant no.1. Six months after the marriage appellant no.1 demanded Rs.20,000/ -in cash. They were unable to pay the money. As a result, the appellants assaulted the victim. She took her daughter back to the matrimonial home and requested them not to subject her to torture. This happened 3 -4 times. Finally her daughter died due to assault. Appellant no.1 informed them about the illness of her daughter in the dead of night. They went to the matrimonial home and found her daughter lying on the floor. They were informed by local people that her daughter was hanged after being killed. She went to Police Station and stated the facts to Police. One Sanaton wrote the complaint and she put her L.T.I. on the complaint. In cross examination, she stated that she came to know of the information at 2 -.30 A.M. She went to Police Station on the next day between 7 -8 A.M. She stated that the marriage was a negotiated one. She stated that they were on visiting terms with the family of the appellants. She denied the suggestion that there was no chance of the victim conceiving due to gynaecological problems. She denied that her daughter was suffering from asthma. She stated that her daughter had no illness. She stated that during the lifetime of her daughter they gave gifts to the appellants during festivals and during Puja. Appellant no.1 attended ''Jamaisasthi '' before the death of her daughter. They attended Mahotsav in the village of the appellants. She stated that the complaint was written at the Police Station and Sanaton wrote it by pen.;