PRADEEP KUMAR, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.6.2002 passed by Shri Bhola Prasad, Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. - IV, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 375 of 1998, by which judgment the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. It is submitted by learned counsel on behalf of the appellant that there is no proper evidence that there was any torture to the victim girl for dowry, and as such, the conviction of the appellant is bad in law and fit to be set aside. He relied on a decision reported in 2002(1) Eastern Indian Cr. Cases page 141 in the case of Sunil Bajaj.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer of the appellant and submitted that there is direct evidence that the appellant was demanding additional dowry of Rs. 50,000/ - and she died an unnatural death in her sasural, which has not been explained by the defence, and as such, the appellant has rightly been found guilty under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.;