DEOKI NANDAN PRASAD, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.5.2000 and order of sentence dated 30.5.2000 passed in Sessions Trial No. 185 of 1996 whereby and whereunder the learned Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh found the appellants guilty under Section 304 -B/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to be as 'Code ') and sentenced appellant No. 1 Naresh Prasad Mehta to undergo RI for life and appellant No. 2 Samli Devi @ Shanti Devi to undergo RI for ten years.
(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that informant Indradeo Mahto gave his written report to the lchak Police Station on 24.11.1995 at about 10.45 a.m. to the effect that his daughter Rita Devi was married with the appellant No. 1 Naresh Prasad Mehta in the year 1994. It is alleged that about a fortnight ago to the date of occurrence, victim girl had come to her parents house and had made complaints against the appellant No. 1 Naresh Prasad Mehta, who is her husband, and appellant No. 2 Samli Devi @ Shanti Devi, who is her mother -in -law, she made complaint that they are demanding motorcycle and cash from her as dowry. After hearing this from his daughter, informant went to his daughter 's sasural and pacified the appellants and then left this daughter there. On 24.11.1995 at about 9.00 a. m.. he came to know that on 22.11.1995 appellants had killed his daughter Rita Devi by throwing her into the well. After receiving this piece of information, he immediately went there along with Sitaram Mehta, Badri Mehta and others and found his daughter lying on cot and he went to the Police Station and gave written report. He further alleged that dead body of his daughter is still lying in the village. On the basis of this written report, Ichak Police Station instituted a case against the appellants bearing Ichak P.S. case No. 82 of 1995 and investigation was taken up. After going through the paraphernalia and investigation, I.O. submitted charge sheet under Section 304 -B/34 of the Code. The Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the charges against the appellants were framed under Section 304 -B/34 of the Code and the learned Court below on the basis of 'evidence, both oral and documentary, found the allegation true against the appellants and accordingly convicted them and sentenced them as above. The defence has taken a plea that she had gone to fetch water and fell into the well and she died due to drowning.
(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellants assailed the judgment on the ground that there is no witness on the point that soon before her (Rita Devi) death, there was demand of dowry and for that, torture was committed upon her. There is no witness on the point of demand of dowry and those who have come to say so are hearsay witnesses. The judgment has further been assailed on the ground that PW 4 who is doctor has not come to the finding about cause of death and all witnesses are interested persons and the symptoms do not suggest that death occurred due to throttling but suggest that death occurred due to drowning.;