- (1.) These two connected appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) The appellants have been convicted for the offence under section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.
(3.) The prosecution story, as it appears from the written report of informant Manoj Kumar Chouhan (P.W. 5) made before Hazaribagh Sadar police station on 10.11.1999, in short was that his sister Yogita Bala @ Baby was married in June 1993 with the appellant Rakesh Narayan Singh according to Hindu rites and customs in the town of Hazaribagh. On the eve of marriage cash and ornaments were given according to the capacity. After marriage his sister lived comfortably for 2/3 months at her matrimonial home but thereafter, she used to apprise her parents on telephone with regard to making sarcastic remarks/taunts of her mother-in-law Urmila Devi(died during trial) on her in presence of her husband Rakesh Narayan Singh, (appellant), and the father-in-law-Kartikeshwar Narayan Singh, (appellant) by stating that nothing had been given as dowry at the lime of marriage though her son was worth Rs. 5 lakhs to which she was entitled to; and that she had accepted her as daughter-in-law in anticipation of getting Rs. 5 lakhs. Whenever such type of comments were passed by her mother-in-law, the appellants used to keep mum, rather they supported her by saying that she (mother-in-law) was right as a result of which the behaviour of the mother-in-law became from bad to worse for which she had to inform her parents to take her back at Khunti as she apprehended danger to life. After one month, at the time of Rakhi Festival her husband Rakesh came to Khunti and took her back to Hazaribagh. Since he was un-employed, he opened a shop in his house. Thereafter mother-in-law and husband used to make demand of money by asking Yogita to bring the same from her parental house for establishing the shop failing which she was asked to go back to her parental house. In the night of Diwali festival she had talked with her aunt(wife of P.W. 4),who was residing at Ranchi, on telephone and had informed of her well being stating that she wanted to go to Khunti during Chatth Festival. One day before her death Yogitga had talked with her mother on telephone in which she pleaded to take her back to Khunti on the plea of celebrating Chatth Festival otherwise she apprehended danger to her life. The informant's mother tried to talk with her husband and inlaws but they declined to talk with her. In the evening of 9.11.1999 informant's uncle(P.W. 4) informed the prosecution party on phone that Yogita was seriously ill and on this they came to Hazaribagh and learnt from P.W. 4 that Yogita had committed suicide by hanging herself. On reaching Hazaribagh at 1.30 a.m. in the night, the prosecution party went to the place of occurrence where they found dead body of Yogita lying on a bed. The informant further alleged that Yogita did not commit suicide by hanging herself rather accused persons had committed her murder. It is further alleged that the prosecution party were informed at Ranchi on phone by the accused persons that all on a sudden Yogita was indisposed and she was taken to Doctor where she was declared dead. Thereafter the informant's uncle (P.W. 4) reported the matter on phone to the Hazaribagh Sadar police station. Lastly it was alleged that Yogita had been lulled by the accused persons who were trying to give it the colour of suicide. Accordingly FIR was drawn under section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.;