Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, J. - (1.) The appellant calls in question the judgment and order of conviction dated 23.06.2015 and 24.06.2015 passed by the Judge, Special Court cum Additional Sessions Judge, Durgapur in connection with S.T. No. 12 of 2007 mainly on the ground that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in its proper perspectives.
(2.) Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the state contended that the learned Trial Court had taken care of all the material aspects and has passed a well-reasoned judgment, which does not warrant any interference.
(3.) In the interest of effective adjudication factual scenario is required to be revisited. The prosecution case, as unfurled herewith, is such that the marriage of the victim was held with the appellant on 08.05.1997 as per Hindu Rites and Ceremonies. Some ornaments and valuables including scooter were gifted at the time of said marriage. Initially the victim was quite happy in her matrimonial home but after one year she began to realise that her husband had illicit affairs with his sister-in-law (Boudi). It is also alleged that after the marriage the victim was tortured on demand of dowry. The victim disclosed her agonies to her parents. Her parents intervened and took steps for amicable settlement, yet the torture continued. On 07.11.2002 the accused allegedly declared that if the victim dies he would marry four women. When the de-facto complainant was coming back from the matrimonial house of the victim, he suddenly heard 'save me' 'save me' and he found her daughter was in burnt condition. He doused the flame but in the meantime the victim breathed her last. Disclosing this fact, the de-facto complainant lodged the F.I.R. and set the law into motion.;