- (1.) Both the criminal appeals Nos. 354 of 2002 and 294 of 2002 arising out of the same judgment of conviction dated 23.5.2009 and order of sentence dated 24.5.2002 passed by Shri Arun Kumar Rai, IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 13/1996, by which judgment he found both the appellants, namely, Islam Ansari and Sultan Ansari guilty under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 10 years.
(2.) It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellants that the prosecution has failed to prove that the victim, Fazrun Nisa died within seven years of her marriage to attract the provisions of Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code and as such the conviction is bad in law and fit to be set aside. He has further submitted that there is no evidence that soon before her death she was subjected to torture for dowry and in that view of the matter also the ingredients of Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code are not fulfilled and hence the conviction is bad in law and fit to be set aside. Learned Counsel further submitted that there is no allegation against the appellant, Islam Ansari (In Cr. Appeal No. 354 of 2002), appellant i.e. father-in-law of the deceased, Sultan Ansari (In Cr. Appeal No. 294 of 2002) and hence it is bad in law and fit to be set aside.
(3.) On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State has supported the prosecution case and stated that there is direct allegation of torture for dowry against both the appellants and the father has given date of marriage in his marriage and hence it is wrong to say that no date of marriage has been given and as such the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge requires no interference by this Court.;