Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 1295 (JHR)

Suresh Munda v. State of Bihar

2006-11-07

DILIP KUMAR SINHA

body2006
JUDGMENT DILIP KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. The present Cr. Appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No. 451/96 on 6th May, 1999 and 7th May, 1999 respectively whereby and whereunder the sole appellant Suresh Munda was convicted under Section 304B I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years therein. 2. The prosecution story is in a narrow compass. The informant Bechan Pahan by presenting a written report before Mandu (Kuju) Police alleged that in June, 1994 his daughter Pairo Devi (since deceased) was married to the appellant Suresh Munda and after the marriage the appellant had been assaulting and extended torture to his wife for dowry and other reasons. On 22.7.96 the informant was communicated that his daughter Pairo Devi was seriously ill in her matrimonial home. When the informant went there with son and other witnesses, he found the dead body of his daughter Pairo Devi at her matrimonial home. On query the appellant narrated that Pairo Devi had committed suicide by taking poison. On the basis of such written report presented by the informant, Mandu (Kuju) P.S. Case No. 234/96 was registered for the offence under Section 304B I.P.C. against the appellant and after investigation the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet against him. 3. The charge accordingly was framed under Section 304B I.P.C. against him but the appellant denied his guilt and expressed that he was implicated only on suspicion. 4. Advancing his argument, learned Counsel submitted that the appellant is innocent and there is no eye witness of the occurrence to substantiate the charge of culpable homicide (dowry death) against him. The prosecution has not been able to prove any demand of dowry being made by the appellant from the informant or others or that he had extended atrocities or cruelty in relation to such demand soon before the unnatural death of Pairo Devi. It would be relevant to mention, the learned Counsel advancing his argument, submitted that P.W. 3 in his statement before the Court has clearly stated that there was no custom in their family or in their society of dowry. It would be relevant to mention, the learned Counsel advancing his argument, submitted that P.W. 3 in his statement before the Court has clearly stated that there was no custom in their family or in their society of dowry. P.W. 2 mother of the deceased, P.W. 3 uncle of the deceased, P.W. 4 cousin of the deceased, P.W. 5 co-villager, P.W. 6 brother of the deceased and P.W. 7 cousin of the deceased were consistent before the Trial Court that when they visited the matrimonial home of Pairo Devi at village Sugia they found her dead body but none of the said witnesses deposed in the Court that the tongue of the deceased was protruded, eyes were prominent and open, face swollen, lips blue, mouth open and that blood was coming out from her both nostrils and in absence of such evidence of the witnesses, the finding of the Doctor who held postmortem examination reporting the appearance of the dead body, in the manner stated above, does not inspire confidence for relying upon his postmortem report. It can well be inferred that in order to make out a case of strangulation, the doctor prepared false postmortem report though the appellant since outset had been strongly contending that his wife Pairo Devi had committed suicide for not giving birth to any child. 5. Learned Counsel further submitted that the inquest witnesses have not been produced and examined to substantiate the observation of the doctor as well as the observation of the police officer who had visited and examined the dead body at first point in time and prepared the inquest report. 6. Advancing his argument, learned Counsel submitted that P.W. 9 Dr. M.D. Tiwary who proved his postmortem report Ext. 4 was specific that he found in the stomach of the dead body some grayish material, mixed with animal dung and had preserved the viscera of the important organs of the deceased for its chemical examinations but the viscera report was not produced on the record, purposely to suppress the evidence of the commission of the suicide. 4 was specific that he found in the stomach of the dead body some grayish material, mixed with animal dung and had preserved the viscera of the important organs of the deceased for its chemical examinations but the viscera report was not produced on the record, purposely to suppress the evidence of the commission of the suicide. In this manner non-production of the viscera report, when the specific defence of the appellant was that Pairo Devi had committed suicide, has heavily prejudiced the appellant and no opportunity could be extended to him to put relevant question about such finding of the doctor in postmortem examination as well as on the report of the viscera after the chemical examination of the different organs of the body of the deceased. 7. Finally it has been submitted that the defence had produced two witnesses with the specific reason as to under what circumstances Pairo Devi committed suicide by taking poison. Both the witnesses were consistent that she committed suicide out of frustration and depression since she had no issue from the appellant, but the learned trial court failed to take into consideration such aspect of the defence of the appellant and did not comment on that. 8. From the judgment, it is evident that the learned trial court below on the basis of the statement of the defence witnesses observed that Pairo Devi was young girl of about 21 years who sustained unnatural death at her matrimonial village within three years of her marriage with the appellant Suresh Munda. 9. P.W. 1 Sub-Inspector B.L. Mishra and P.W. 10 Sunil Kumar Singh were Investigating Officers of the case. The case was investigated casually by P.W. 10 Sunil Kumar Singh but the charge-sheet in the instant case was submitted by P.W. 1 S.I. B.L. Mishra. The formal F.I.R. as well as endorsement made thereon was proved by a formal witness P.W. 8. I further find that for the reasons best known to the prosecution the postmortem report was proved by the formal witnesses P.W. 8 as ext. 4 though the report was prepared by P.W. 9 Dr. M.D. Tiwary. The informant Bechan Pahan died in course of trial on 19.1.98 and hence he could not be examined. 10. I further find that for the reasons best known to the prosecution the postmortem report was proved by the formal witnesses P.W. 8 as ext. 4 though the report was prepared by P.W. 9 Dr. M.D. Tiwary. The informant Bechan Pahan died in course of trial on 19.1.98 and hence he could not be examined. 10. On the allegation of demand of dowry, P.W. 2 Jirwa Devi who is the mother of the deceased is a specific that whenever her daughter Pairo Devi used to visit her parental home she had been narrating that her husband was extending torture by way of assaulting her for the fulfillment of the demand of dowry. She further narrated that when she visited the matrimonial home of Pairo Devi, she spotted black spots on both the sides of her neck and her both arms were swollen. In the cross-examination she admitted that there was a customs of giving and taking of dowry. On the eve of marriage a wrist Watch as well as a cycle was given to the appellant. She admitted that no Panchayati was held in respect of demand of dowry by the appellant. P.W. 3 Adhin Karmali is more specific about the nature of the demand of dowry by the appellant and narrated that whenever Pairo Devi used to come to her parental home from her Sasural she had been narrating her miseries that she was tortured and assaulted by the appellant by way of putting pressure to bring Baja (Transistor) and battery as dowry. This witness also corroborated that he had spotted the marks of violence on both the sides of her neck as well as on both arms and chest when he visited the matrimonial home of Pairo Devi and found her dead body. He admitted that there was no custom of giving or taking dowry in his society but people used to give and take according to their choice. 11. Similarly P.W. 4 Shobha Munda and P.W. 7 Bisheshwar Pahan, the cousins of the deceased are consistent that whenever Pairo Devi used to come to her parental home she had been narrating about the torture and ill treatment extended to her at the hands of the appellant forcing her to bring a Baja and battery in dowry. 11. Similarly P.W. 4 Shobha Munda and P.W. 7 Bisheshwar Pahan, the cousins of the deceased are consistent that whenever Pairo Devi used to come to her parental home she had been narrating about the torture and ill treatment extended to her at the hands of the appellant forcing her to bring a Baja and battery in dowry. Both the witnesses are consistent that they spotted dried blood on the mouth of Pairo Devi as well as on her bed and cloths. There were marks of violence on her chest, arms and neck and on query it was stated that she committed suicide. The witnesses stood to the test of their cross-examination. 12. P.W. 5 Bhaju Mahto, P.W. 6 Jhaman Munda have been produced and examined on behalf of the prosecution as independent witnesses who had accompanied the other witnesses to the Sasural of Pairo Devi on the information that she was ill and they in their depositions corroborated having seen marks of violence on the body of Pairo Devi as well as dried blood on the clothes and the bed of the deceased. The statement of P.W. 6 Jhaman Munda is important in the sense that he spotted nail marks on the neck of Pairo Devi and therefore, he had reason to believe that she was strangulated to death besides, other marks of violence on the other part of her body. 13. P.W. 9 Dr. M.D. Tiwary held postmortem examination on the body of Pairo Devi on 24.7.96, female aged about 21 years and found the following: Tongue protruded. Both the eyes prominent and open. Face Swollen. Lips blue. Blood froth coming from both nostrils. Mouth open. Body slightly decomposed/and mygots present on the body. Neck swollen and bruises of nails present on both sides of neck. There was discharge of feacusfrom anus. On dissection the doctor found that the left chamber of the heart was empty whereas the right was full of blood clots. The neck veins and lungs congested. Kidneys. Liver and spleen were also congested. In the stomach of the deceased the doctor found grayish materials about four ounces mixed with animal dung. 14. The Doctor admitted in his statement that the viscera of the portions of heart, lungs, spleen, liver, kidney and stomach were preserved for chemical examination but no viscera report was produced before him. Kidneys. Liver and spleen were also congested. In the stomach of the deceased the doctor found grayish materials about four ounces mixed with animal dung. 14. The Doctor admitted in his statement that the viscera of the portions of heart, lungs, spleen, liver, kidney and stomach were preserved for chemical examination but no viscera report was produced before him. The Doctor assessed the time elapsed since death within 48 hours. In his opinion the cause of death of Pairo Devi was asphyxia due to strangulation and further stressed "only because of strangulation". The Doctor clarified in the cross-examination that the nail marks found on the neck of the deceased were ante-mortem marks of violence and that she was strangulated by hands and nails. 15. The following facts imanate from the discussions made above: (i) The death of Pairo Devi took place otherwise than under normal circumstances i.e. by asphyxia due to strangulation within 7 years of her marriage. (ii) She was subjected to cruelty by the appellant for dowry in kind of Baja and battery in the near proximity of her death. 16. In the present case admittedly there is no eye witness of the occurrence and the entire prosecution story is based upon circumstantial evidence and I find that the chain of circumstances are fettered which leads to guilt of non-other than the appellant causing dowry death who was the husband of the deceased Pairo Devi and had been extending torture for dowry and the cause of death was found strangulation. The presence of grayish substance mixed with animal dung in the stomach of Pairo Devi during her post mortem examination tells hair stirring story about the circumstances of her death as to how animal dung mixed with some other substance was administered in her mouth and thereafter she was strangulated to death with the mark of violence on her neck, arms and chest with evidence of blood coming out from her mouth as well as from her nostrils which gives a horrified picture of brutal murder of Pairo Devi by none other than the husband appellant. 17. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I find that the prosecution has been able to prove the case and charge under Section 304B I.P.C. against the appellant Suresh Munda. The judgment delivered by the leaned Trial Court below is well discussed which does not call for interference in appeal. 17. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I find that the prosecution has been able to prove the case and charge under Section 304B I.P.C. against the appellant Suresh Munda. The judgment delivered by the leaned Trial Court below is well discussed which does not call for interference in appeal. I further find that the sentence awarded to the appellant is adequate in view of the gravity of the offence proved against him. There is no merit in this appeal and hence it is dismissed: 18. The bail granted to the appellant stands vacated and he is directed to serve out the remaining period of sentence in the judicial custody. Appeal dismissed.