- (1.) ON repeated calls, nobody appears on behalf of the appellants. In that view of the matter, on the request of the court, Shri Tapas Roy assisted the court as 'Amicus Curie' on behalf of the appellants.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 17.01.2002 and order of sentence dated 19.01.2002 passed by Shri Ravindra Prasad Ravi, 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No. 444 of 1995, by which judgment, he found both the accused guilty for the offence under Sections 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He convicted the appellants and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. It appears that the Prosecution case was started on the basis of a fardbeyan given by the father of the deceased, namely Mohan Mahto (P.W.6), who stated on 05.07.1995 that his daughter, Rusha Devi, aged about 23 years, was married with the accused, Kauleshwar Mahto S/o Guli Mahto three years back according to Hindu Marriage Act. After marriage, his daughter was living at her 'sasural' and she used to come to her 'naihar' twice or thrice a year. One month back, when she came to her sasural, she stated that her husband and her father -in -law, both are demanding Rs. 5000/ - and a loudspeaker and they were continuously harassing and assaulting her. Since, he was a poor man and he was not able to give Rs. 5,000/ -, he came to his daughter's 'sasural' and asked his son -in -law that he will fulfill his demand in future, and then he left with his daughter. It is stated that on 04.07.1995, his son -in -law, Kauleshwar Mahto came and stated that his daughter, Rusha Devi has got fit of 'mirgi', then the informant alongwith his wife, Simti Devi, elder brother, Sabir Mahto and his nephew Jagan Mahto went to her daughter's 'sasural' and found her dead. On enquiry, he came to know that she died on 04.07.1995 at about 2 P.M. On physical examination of the dead body of the deceased, it appears that there is a mark of strangulation on her neck and her face was swollen, which clearly shows that she was strangulated to death by the accused persons for not giving the money and loudspeaker, as dowry, as demanded by the accused persons.
(3.) ON the basis of the said fardbeyan, police registered a case under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation police submitted a charge sheet against the accused persons under the aforesaid sections.;