S.K. Sahoo, J. - (1.) The appellant Prakash Naik along with his parents Deba Naik and Lalita Naik and younger brother Babula Naik faced trial in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar in Sessions Case No. 46 of 2003 for offences punishable under Ss. 498A, 304 -B, 302/34 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The learned Trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 20.09.2006 acquitted the co -accused persons of all the charges so also the appellant of the charge under Ss. 302/34 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code but found him guilty under Ss. 498 -A, 304 -B of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence under Sec. 304 -B of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ -, in default, to undergo imprisonment for two months under Sec. 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code and both the sentences were directed to run consecutively. No separate sentence was awarded for the offence under Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
(2.) The prosecution case as per the First Information Report lodged by Bipra Naik (P.W.2) before the Inspector in -charge, Bhanjanagar Police Station on 07.05.2003 is that his daughter Sunitarani Naik (hereafter 'the deceased') had married the appellant on 06.03.2003 and after marriage the bride and bridegroom lived happily and peacefully for about a month but thereafter the appellant being incited by his family members started demanding Rs. 5000/ - and a cycle. The deceased conveyed the demand of the appellant to the informant who in turn gave assurance to fulfill such demand within two to four months. The appellant started torturing the deceased physically and mentally. Even the mother -in -law, father -in -law, brother -in -law and sister -in -law of the deceased were also assaulting her and insisting for fulfillment of cash and cycle demand and threatening the deceased with dire consequences in the event of non -fulfillment of such demand. Though the deceased communicated about her suffering to the informant but the latter did not give much importance on it. It is further stated in the FIR that on 5.5.2003 night, the appellant and his family members assaulted the deceased, poured kerosene on her and set her on fire in the backyard of their house. Getting such message, the informant rushed to Bhanjanagar Hospital and found the charred body of the deceased. He suspected that the accused persons had killed the deceased. Since he lost his mental balance, there was delay in lodging the FIR. Prior to the lodging of F.I.R. by P.W.2, on receipt of a written report on 06.05.2003 from Dr. Alekh Chandra Sahoo (P.W.6), Medical Officer, S.D. Hospital, Bhanjanagar regarding the death of the deceased on account of massive burn injuries, P.W.16 Devi Prasad Chakravaraty, Inspector in -charge, Bhajanagar Police station registered Bhanjanagar P.S. U.D. Case No. 11 of 2003 and took up inquiry. During course of inquiry, he visited S.D. Hospital, Bhanjanagar, examined P.W.6 and other witnesses, held inquest over the dead body of the deceased on 6.5.2003 at about 8.00 a.m. in presence of the Executive Magistrate and prepared inquest report Ext. 1. He sent the dead body for post mortem examination to S.D. Hospital, Bhanjanagar and seized some burnt ashes and a burnt plastic jerricane and a piece of burnt cotton saree from the spot in village Jogimari under seizure list Ext. 10. He also seized the command certificate, some broken bangles and a saree of the deceased under seizure list Ext. 8. On 07.05.2003 after receipt of the written report from P.W.2, P.W.16 drew up formal F.I.R. and accordingly Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No. 65 dated 07.05.2003 was registered under Ss. 498 -A, 304 -B, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioner and his family members. The I.O. examined the informant and other witnesses, visited the spot and prepared spot map Ext. 12. He also seized the list of dowry articles Ext. 9 on the production by the informant under seizure list Ext. 3. The dowry articles were seized from the house of the appellant under seizure list Ext. 4 and those were given in the zima of the informant after executing Zimanama Ext. 5. The appellant was arrested on 08.05.2003 and he was forwarded to the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhanjanagar on 09.05.2003. On the prayer of the Investigating Officer, the seized exhibits were sent to R.F.S.L., Berhampur by S.D.J.M., Bhanjanagar for chemical analysis and accordingly the chemical examination report Ext. 14 was received in Court. On 22.05.2003 the Investigating officer received the post mortem examination report Ext. 7 and after completion of investigation, charge -sheet was submitted on 26.07.2003 against four accused persons including the appellant under Ss. 498 -A, 304 -B, 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
(3.) After submission of charge sheet, the case was committed to the Court of Session for trial after observing due committal procedure where the learned Trial Court charged the appellant and co -accused persons Deba Naik, Smt. Lalita Naik and Babula Naik under Ss. 498 -A, 304 -B, 302/34 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act on 08.12.2003 and since the appellant and other co -accused persons refuted the charge, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, the sessions trial procedure was resorted to prosecute them and establish their guilt.;