D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) BOTH these appellants were tried and convicted for the offence under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of 10 years by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Tract Court, II, Chatra in S.T No. 352 of 1996. Feeling aggrieved, the appellants have preferred this appeal. The case relates to the unnatural death of the deceased Ishri Devi, the daughter of the informant Kishun Yadav (PW2) which had occurred on 26.4.1996 at 8.00 a.m. at village Chopey within Simaria Police Station in the district of Chatra.
(2.) THE case was registered on the basis of the fard beyan of the informant (PW2) recorded by the officer in charge at village Chopey on 27.4.1996 at 6.30 p.m. The brief facts of the case is that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with appellant No. 1 in the month of Vaishakh in 1995. The girl continued to live at her parents house even after her marriage and after about 8 months, during the period of Holi of the following year, she was taken by her husband to her matrimonial house after the ceremony of "Gauna". On Friday preceding the alleged date of the occurrence, one Dular Yadav (PW11) of the village Chopey came to the house of the informant asking about the whereabouts of the deceased, while stating that the girl had left her matrimonial house in the morning of 8.00 a.m. to dispose of a basketful of cow dung, but she did not return home. The informant (PW2) along with the younger brother Gobardhan Yadav (PW1) and a few other villagers went to village Chopey. They searched at several places for the girl, but not finding her, they returned to their own village. Later on in the morning, i.e. on 27.4.1996, the informant again went to village Chopey and on the way he met one Chhatriya Yadav (PW10) a resident of the village Chopey who informed him that the dead body of his daughter (deceased) was found in a well. On being pointed out, the informant went to the well situated by the side of a mango tree within the premises of the Mukhiya of the village namely Baijnath Singh and he found the dead body of her daughter lying on the ground. He observed marks of injuries and black spots on her eyes with bleeding from her nostril. He was told by the villagers present there that the dead body of the girl was recovered from the well. The informant has claimed that the husband and father -in -law namely the present appellants had ill treated and subjected the girl to cruelty on account of which the girl had committed suicide by drowning in the well. The informant has added that on the occasion of last Holy when the son -in -law along with the informants daughter visited his house, he had expressed his displeasure on the poor quality of clothes presented to him and had refused to accept the clothes. Both the appellants have denied the charges pleading not guilty and have expressed their innocence and false implication in the case. At the trial, the prosecution examined altogether 15 witnesses, including informant (PW2) and his brother Gobardhan (PW1) and also Doctor Nitya Nand Mandal (PW8), who had conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. The investigating officer of the case was not examined and both the fard beyan of the informant and the formal FIR was introduced and proved in evidence by the prosecution by formal witnesses namely, Brahmadeo Prasad (PW9) and Md. Alamgeer, (PW15). Out of the remaining witnesses, PW3 Jamuna Yadav, PW4 Kashi Sao, PW5 Bhawani Yadav, PW6 Basudeo Yadav and PW7 Jadu @ Jadubir Yadav were merely tendered for their respective cross examination. PW13 Dilchand Yadav, a resident of the village Chopey, was declared hostile by the prosecution since he had not supported the prosecution case. PW12 Sanjay Prasad is a witness to the inquest which was held on the dead body of the deceased by the police officer.
(3.) THE trial court on considering the evidence on record, had placed reliance on the testimony of the informant (PW 2) and that of the informants brother (PW1) and on the evidence of the Doctor, PW8 and bad recorded its finding of guilt against both the appellants under Section 304 IPC.;