- (1.) THE 3 (Three) appellants herein namely (1) Md. Majid @ Gopi @ Hayet Newas; (2) Ekbal Hussain @ Md. Ekbal Hussain; and (3) Salma Bibi @ Zorina have challenged the judgment dated 30th June, 2006 and the order dated 3/7/2006 whereby and where under they were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 498A / 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant No. 1, Hayet Newas, was also found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. However, so far as the Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned they were not found guilty under Sections 304B / 34 of the Indian Penal Code and they were found entitled to an order under Section 235 (i) of the Cr.P.C. The 3 (Three) accused were sentenced to Two years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ - each and in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 2 months for committing the offence punishable under Sections 498A / 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellant No. 1 was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and in default, to suffer 6 (Six) more months' rigorous imprisonment for having committed the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences upon the Appellant No. 1 were to run concurrently.
(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that the deceased Nilofar Begum was married to the Appellant No. 1 on 16/1/04. The mother of the deceased namely Hosna Begum (informant) had promised to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/ - at the time of marriage but she actually paid Rs. 25,000/ - to the father of the Appellant No. 1 and the remaining amount of Rs. 5,000/ - remained unpaid with an undertaking that the same would be paid after the marriage. The informant alleged that the father -in -law, mother -in -law and elder brother -in -law demanded other articles from her and when these were not provided; the deceased was subjected to torture. On 3/12/04, the informant received an information that her son -in -law namely the Appellant No. 1 had poured kerosene oil on her daughter and had set her ablaze. At about 11 P.M. the informant and others went to the Howrah Hospital and were told that Nilofar had been admitted. Accordingly the informant prayed that the accused persons be punished.
(3.) IT has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that out of a term imprisonment of 10 years, the Appellant No. 1 has already been in jail for 7 and 1/2 years. So far as the Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, they were convicted under Section 498A and were sentenced to undergo 2 years' rigorous imprisonment as stated above. However, these 2 (Two) appellants namely, the Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 were granted bail and they have remained on bail. The dying declaration which Exhibit 5 has been brought on record at Page 4 of the paper book says that Nilofar had stated that she had been set ablaze by her husband at about 11 P.M and then he had tried to run away. On the basis of the F.I.R, Howrah Police Station Case No. C/279/04 dated 4/12/04 was initiated. The Police took up investigation recorded statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C and after completion of investigation the Investigating Officer submitted a charge -sheet against the appellant under Sections 498A / 34, 304 / 34 read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The learned C.J.M, Howrah took cognizance on the basis of the charge -sheet and committed the case to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Howrah which was subsequently transferred to the Court of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, First Fast Track Court, Howrah vide Sessions Trial No. C/No. 410/05 who ultimately passed the impugned judgment. The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses.;