- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 31.1.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C No.V, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No.374 of 2000 whereby and whereunder the trial court while acquitting the appellants under Section 302 found them guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 304B and also for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 201, 313 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for each of the offences under Section 304B and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eight years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence punishable under Section 313 of the Indian Penal Code and with default clause and were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence punishable under Section 201 and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- with default clause.
(2.) The case of the prosecution as has been made out in the FIR is that one Rahana Khatoon was married to Farookh Ansari (appellant no.2) in the year1999. After the marriage, she came to her in-laws' place. After 2-3 months of the marriage, father-in-law Hasim Ansari (appellant no.1) and sisters-in-law (appellants no.3, 4 and 5) and also the husband (appellant no.2) started putting forth the demand of Rs.20,000/- and one sewing machine. Upon it when Rahana Khatoon (the deceased) asked them that it is not possible for her father to meet the demand, she was abused and was subjected to assault. This continued for quite a long time. On 17.6.2000, when her father (P.W.4) came to her place, accused persons assaulted and abused her by saying that if the demand made is not fulfilled, they will kill her. When the father tried to rescue her, husband gave a kick on her belly, as a result of which, pregnancy got aborted. Seeing all this when her father tried to take her to his house, her husband and father-in-law did not allow her to go with her father. Next morning, i.e.18.6.2000, her father went away. Thereafter on 19.6.2000 her husband took her to Dr.Indira Prasad for cleaning as she had earlier suffered abortion. On 21.6.2000 she was brought home where some medicine was given to her and also some medicine was injected, as a result of which, she fell asleep. When she felt extensive heat, she woke up and found herself burning. She shouted for help but nobody came to rescue her and then she became unconscious. When she regained consciousness, she found herself in the hospital where her husband and father-in-law were present, who told her to make statement as per their wishes, otherwise she would be killed. She became quite fearful and as such, she made statement but what statement she could give, she is not remembering. After a while when her mother (P.W.3) came, they asked her to put her signature over a blank piece of paper on the pretext that unless and until it is signed, Doctor will not start treating her. Meanwhile, when Sub-Inspector, Lalan Thakur (not examined) of Bariatu Police Station came to the hospital, he recorded her fardbeyan (Ext.4) on 23.6.2000 at the hospital, upon it a formal FIR was drawn against all the five accused persons-appellants. On 27.6.2000, the deceased in course of treatment succumbed to her burn injuries. Thereupon one Md.Gani Ansari (P.W.5) brother of the deceased made statement before the police to thesame effect. During investigation, Investigating Officer held inquest on the dead body and sent the dead body for post mortem examination which was conducted by Dr.R.S.Sahu (not examined). However, post mortem examination report (Ext.7) has been proved by a formal witness. From the post mortem examination report it appears that Doctor did find "Dermo epidermal burn injury involving whole of the body surface except front and back of lower abdomen, a portion of thigh and sole. Doctor issued post mortem examination report (Ext.7) with an opinion that death was caused due to burn injury and on account of its complication. After completion of investigation, when charge sheet was submitted, cognizance of the offences was taken against all the appellants. Thereupon when the case was committed to the court of sessions, charges were framed to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses. Of them, P.W.1, Naim Ansari, brother of the deceased, P.W.2, Mumtaz Ansari, relative of the deceased, P.W.3, Rahamtul Khatoon, mother of the deceased, P.W.5, Gani Ansari, brother of the deceased did depose that the deceased after getting married to appellant no.2 when came to her in-laws' place, all the appellants started demanding Rs.20,000/- and sewing machine. In order to get the demand fulfilled, she was being subjected to abuse and assault. They also testified about the fact which is there in the fardbeyan relating to deceased being burnt to death. P.W.6, Qurban Ansari has turned hostile. P.W.7, Ajay Kumar, an Advocate clerk has proved post mortem report of the deceased and P.W.8, Dr.Indira Prasad has testified that police had enquired about the matter relating to abortion but she had told him that in absence of any paper, she cannot say as to whether she had ever treated the deceased or not. Upon closure of the prosecution case, incriminating materials appearing against the accused persons were put to the appellants under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which they denied.
(3.) The trial court having relied upon the testimonies of the witnesses and also over the fardbeyan (Ext.4) of the deceased did find the appellants guiltyfor the offences as aforesaid and accordingly, recorded the order of conviction and sentence which is under challenge.;