Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. A. S. Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioners. No one appears on behalf of the State.
(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 24-9-1998 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in Cri. Appeal No. 81 of 1991 whereby and whereunder the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed against the petitioners by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridh in connection with G.R. Case No. 1117 of 1988, T.R. No. 317 of 1991 convicting the petitioners for the offences punishable S. 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and u/Ss. 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentencing them to maximum period of two years R.I. u/S. 498-A of the Indian Penal Code has been affirmed.
(3.) The prosecution story in brief is that the informant was married to the petitioner No. 1 nine to ten years prior to the institution of the First Information Report. It is alleged that after remaining peacefully for some time in her matrimonial house a demand of dowry was made and on account of non-fulfillment of the said demand she was subjected to torture. It is also alleged that a panchayati was held but the accused persons had stuck to their demand of Rs. 35,000/-. On intervention of the villagers the informant was kept at her matrimonial house wherein after three to four months the demand of Rs. 35,000/- once again started and on non-fulfillment of which she was mercilessly assaulted and outsted from her matrimonial house.;