D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) The appellants have challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, passed by the Court of the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Palamau in Sessions Trial No. 244 of 2003. whereby they were convicted for the offence under Section 306 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven years and further convicted for the offences under Sections 498 -A, 120 -B and 201 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years.
(2.) THE case against the appellants was registered on 1.3.2001 at Chhatterpur Police Station on the basis of the First Information Report lodged by the informant Arun Chandra Gupta (PW 7). The informant's specific case is that his sister, namely Santosh Devi was married to the appellant No. 2, Sunil Kumar Gupta in the year 1992. The deceased used to live at her matrimonial house in the company of her husband and her parents -in -law, namely, the appellant No. 1 and the appellant No. 3 respectively. In the morning of 27.2.2001, the younger brother -in -law of the deceased conveyed telephonic information to the informant that his sister -in -law, namely, the deceased Santosh Devi had died. On receipt of the information, the informant along with some close relatives went to the matrimonial village of his deceased -sister, and was informed by the father -in -law (appellant No. 1) in the night of 27th February, 2001 the deceased suddenly, developed acute abdominal pain and was found dead in the morning. The informant has accused the members of the matrimonial family of the deceased of not having provided prompt medical aid to the deceased. He has also alleged that the behaviour of the members of the matrimonial family towards the deceased was not good and they used to torture her and information regarding such torture was conveyed to the informant by a letter addressed to him. On his allegation that the deceased was killed by her husband and in -laws pursuant to a conspiracy hatched out between them and such allegation being based on the fact that the funeral ceremony of the deceased was hastily performed, the FIR was lodged and on the basis of the FIR, the case was registered against the present three appellants.
(3.) ALL the three appellants were put on trial for the offences under Sections 302/34, 201, 498 -A and 120 -B of the IPC.;