- (1.) ALL the four appellants were put on trial to face charge under Sections 304B/34, 302/34 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for committing murder of one Sombari Mahatain. The trial court while acquitting all the appellants for offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act did find all the appellants guilty for the offence under Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the appellant Haru Mahato was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment lor ten years for an offence under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code whereas all other appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. However, no separate sentence was passed under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that Sombari Mahatain, daughter of the informant Jyoti Mahato (P. W. 3) was married to the appellant Haru Mahato two years before the date of occurrence. At the time of marriage, Rs. 48,000/ - in cash as well as clothes and utensils etc. were given to them. For two months, Sombari Mahatain lived quite happily in her in -law's place but thereafter all the appellants started taunting her by saying 'Kali -Kali' as she was of dark complexion. The accused persons then started asking her to bring Rs. 30,000/ -, otherwise she would be deserted and her husband would be taking another marriage. Haru Mahato used to come to her in - law's place oftenly for taking money and the informant Jyoti Mahato sometimes gave Rs. 1,500/ - and sometimes Rs. 2,000/ -. In spite of that, Haru Mahato the other day came to his in - law's place and asked for Rs. 30,000/ - for doing business but when the informant refused to oblige him, he went away alongwith his wife by giving threat that they will have to face dire consequence. On 31.10.2003 Bhismadeo Mahato, father of Haru Mahto came in the evening and told to the informant Jyoti Mahato (P.W. 3) that his daughter has been admitted to TMH as she was ill. On getting this information, the informant Jyoti Mahato (P.W. 3) sent his son Jethu Ram and nephew Deepak Mahato to TMH to see his daughter but when they went to TMH, they did not find Sombari Mahatain there and then both of them came to in -law's place of Sombari Mahatain where they found her dead. On getting this information, the informant Jyoti Mahato (P.W. 3) j came to his daughter's place where police on getting information about the death of Sombari Mahatain had already reached over there and gave Fardbeyan (Ext. -1/2) to one Arun Kumar, Sub -Inspector of Chandil Police Station, upon which formal First Information Report (Ext. -4) was drawn. The said Sub -Inspector (P.W. 7) took up the investigation and held inquest on thE dead body and prepared inquest report (Ext. -3). Thereafter the dead body was sent for post mortem examination which was conducted by Dr. Lalan Choudhary (P.W. 8), who on holding autopsy did firm following injuries: 1. Lacerated wound 2.5 cm. x 2 cm. into muscle deep over right side of occipital scalp. On dissection -Occipital scalp was found contused 10 cm. x 5 cm. Whole brain on its left side was massively found contused. 2. Right side of muscle was found contused. Hyoid bone was found contused. 3. Larynx and tracheal was found congested and was having fine froth.
(3.) ACCORDING to Dr., death was caused on account of head injury caused by hard and blunt substance. Post mortem report was proved as Ext. -5.;