LAKSHMAN URAON, J. - (1.) BOTH the appellants, named above, have preferred this appeal, challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 20th December, 1999, passed by Sri Vinod Kumar Sinha, learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih, in Sessions Trial No. 104 of 1997, arising out of Bagodar (Suriya) PS, Case No. 20 of 1997, corresponding to G.R. No. 246 of 1997, whereby and whereunder both of them have been convicted under Sections 304 -B and 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 304 -B of the Indian Penal Code and imprisonment for three years for the offence under Section 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each. However, it has been ordered that both the sentences in each count in respect of both the convicts shall run concurrently.
(2.) THE facts leading to the present case are that PW 3, Tukani Massomat, wife oi 'late Roshan Mandal, had four daughters. Deceased Khiriya Devi was married with appellant No. 1, Rajendra Mandal four years prior to the alleged date of occurrence dated 14th February, 1997 at village Nagar Keswari Mahua Toli, Police Station - Suriya Bagodar, District -Giridih. The informant PW 5, Prasadi Mandal is the maternal uncle of deceased Khiriya Devi. The younger sister of the deceased, namely, Dropadi Devi (PW 2) is residing in the same village in the house of her mother (PW 3), being the youngest daughter and her husband is looking after her and her mother as Ghar - jamai, Khiriya Devi and two other sisters were given in marriage after performing Tilak ceremony, selling the landed properties. Khiriya Devi 'smarriage was also performed in the similar manner. Whatever landed properties remained after performing the marriage of three daughters, PW 3, Tukani Massomat executed a deed of transfer regarding those remaining landed property in favour of her youngest daughter PW 2, Dropadi Devi. Since thereafter, both the appellants and one absconding accused Koli Mandal started torturing Khiriya Devi, forcing her to demand some lands in their favour also from her mother Tukani Massomat by executing deed of transfer. When some portions of land could not be transferred in favour of the appellants, they started assaulting and torturing Khiriya Devi. On 14.2.1997 at about 4.00 p.m. the youngest Bhagani of the informant (PW 5) Draupadi Devi (PW 2) informed the informant weepingly that her elder sister Khiriya Devi was done to death by her father -in -law, mother -in -law and husband. The informant along with villagers Arjun Mandal (PW 4), Laxman Mandal and Shivdhan Mandal (PW 5) went and saw the dead body of Khiriya Devi, lying on a cot. Blood was seen oozing out from both the ears and also from her private part. The clothes (sari) was smeared with blood. There was mark of assault on her body. Tukni Massomat (PW 2) has informed that due to non -transferring of some portion of the land in favour of the accused/appellants, they used to torture and assault Khiriya Devi, depriving her of water and food. They always used assault her and compel her to ask her mother to transfer some lands in their favour also. Several panchayats were also held in this regard but that could not satisfy their greed for the landed properties. The fardbeyan of the informant was recorded on 15.2.1997 at Nagar Keshwari Mahua Toli at 9.30 a.m. Accused Koli Mandal absconded; hence his case was separated. To prove the charges framed against both the appellants, prosecution examined seven witnesses whereas defence has also examined three witnesses. PW 1 Dr. K. Kumar has conducted autopsy on the dead body of Khiriya Devi and prepared Post Mortem Report (Ext. 1) in his pen and signature. PW 2, Dropadi Devi is the younger sister of the deceased and was residing in the same village. PW 3 Tukni Massomat is the mother of the deceased and PW 5 is the informant Prasadi Mandal, maternal uncle of the deceased. PW 4 Arjun Mandal is a hearsay witness, who was informed about the alleged occurrence by one Nageshwar Mandal. When he went to the house of the appellants, he saw the dead body. He is also an eye -witness on the inquest report on which he signed (Ext. 2) PW 6, Sheod -hyan Mandal is a hostile witness and PW 7 Ram Naresh Singh is the Investigation Officer of this case. DW 1, Prasadi Mandal, DW 2 Chuta Mandal and DW 3 Punit Mandal alias Punit Mahto have deposed that in the night of the alleged occurrence some thieves/dacoits entered into the house of Koli Mandal. They assaulted Khiriya Devi, who succumbed to her injuries but all the defence witnesses of the same Village - Nagar Keswari had not gone to the house of Koli Mandal when the thieves/dacoits had entered into her house. DW 1 has deposed that there was no demand of dowry and torture. However, he admits that two and half years prior to the alleged occurrence Khiriya Devi was married with appellant No. 1 Rajendra Mandal. No one has informed about commission of any theft or dacoity in the house of Koli Mandal. Similar is the evidence of DW 2, Chuta Mahdal and DW 3 Punit Mandal @ Punit Mahto.
(3.) LEARNED Court below found that the marriage of deceased Khiriya Devi was performed with appellant No. 1 Randendra Mandal within seven years of the alleged unnatural death of Khiriya Devi. He relied the evidence of PW 2, Dropadi Devi regarding torture and assault, meted out to her married sister Khiriya Devi. The informant Prasadi Mandal (PW 5) and his sister PW 3 Tukni Massomat have supported the demand regarding transfer of some lands in favour of the appellants and when the land could not transferred in their favour by Tukni Massomat, as the remaining lands were already transferred by executing registered deed in favour of Dropadi Devi, PW 2, the alleged torture and assault to Khiriya Devi took place resulting her death in her matrimonial house. The IO (PW 7) when went to the place of occurrence, on being informed by one villager that the dead body of Khiriya Devi is lying, did not find any appellants in the house rather all had fled away. Inquest report (Ext. 2), prepared by the IO, also goes to show that the dead body was found in the house of these appellants on a cot (khat). PW 1, Dr. K. Kumar, who conducted the autopsy on 16.2.1997 on the dead body of Khiriya Devi, aged about 18 years found several abrasions, swellings, bruises, lacerations and ec -chymosis and opined that all were anti -mortem in nature, caused by hard and blunt object and the death since post -mortem examination was within two to three days. The learned Court below considered all these aspects and came to the conclusion that there was demand of landed property towards dowry for which she was assaulted soon prior to her death and died within seven years of her marriage in her matrimonial house, attracting Section 113 -B of the Indian Evidence Act. Being satisfied with the evidence, adduced on behalf of the prosecution, the learned Court below convicted the appellants and sentenced them thereunder whereas he disbelieved the evidence of the defence witnesses, who had given a different story regarding commission of theft/dacoity in the house of these appellants and in commission of such theft/dacoity Khiriya Devi was assaulted by the thieves/dacoits, resulting her death:;