- (1.) Total four persons, including the present appellant, the husband of the deceased housewife, were placed in a sessions trial to answer charges for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/302/304-B/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. While all the three relations of this appellant were acquitted from all the charges brought against them, the present appellant, however, convicted under Sections 304-B/498A/201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, 3 years and 3 years respectively thereunder and to pay fines with default clauses.
(2.) Challenging the said order of conviction, this appeal has been preferred and after its admission, now the appellant has approached this Court for suspension of sentence.
(3.) Mr. Sudipta Moitra, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant vehemently contends that only two witnesses, namely, P.W.1 and P.W.3, the parents of the victim lady made the allegation that soon before her death, the accused person demanded dowry. He further submits that there is no independent corroboration and only the person, who does not belong to the family of the parents of the victim, namely, P.W.2, has no direct knowledge about such demand and whatever he disclosed, are hearsay in nature and completely inadmissible evidence. He further submits that if at all, the allegation is accepted, the same is identical against all the persons placed on trial but the court below took an erroneous approach and convicted this appellant merely because he is the husband. He also submits that this is a case of term imprisonment and the appellant was all through on bail during trial and he never misused his such liberty. Therefore, he prays that the appellant's prayer for suspension of sentence be considered favourably.;