Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 447 (JHR)

Mahru Mahto v. State of Bihar (now Jharkhand)

2006-04-24

D.P.SINGH

body2006
JUDGMENT : By Court.-Both the appellants stand convicted for the offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for three years by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo at Tenughat in Sessions Trial No. 108 of 1997/49 of 1997. 2. Briefs facts leading to this appeal are that Urmila Devi was married with Fagu Mahto, son of these two appellants. In the summer of 1995, it is further stated that during marriage, the informant Kahani Mahto has given gifts etc. as per his status. It is further stated that for sometimes, his daughter and son-in-law were happy till Fagu Mahto starting demanding Rs. 5000/- in cash, wristwatch and cycle etc. In the result, Urmila Devi was tortured by all her in-laws. 3. As stated on 27th November, 1996, Fagu Mahto. came to the informant and informed him that Urmila was ill. However, immediately, the informant came to know that Urmila Devi was dead. Thereafter, the informant reached at the house of the appellants to find that his daughter Urmila was lying dead in village-Baradih. These facts were also narrated to Nawadih police at about 9 A.M. and on the basis of which Nawadih Police Station Case No. 88 of 1996 under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was instituted against three accused persons. 4. The police investigated the case and finally submitted charge-sheet against all the three accused persons under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Their case was committed for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned lower court framed charges against the three accused persons under Sections 302/304B/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court after examining the witnesses found and held the appellants guilty under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court has acquitted all the accused persons from the charges under Sections 302 and 304B of the Indian Penal Code. 5. The present appeal has been preferred on behalf of the parents of Fagu Mahto who has remained in custody till the 'final disposal of the trial from November 1996 to July 2000. It is apparent from the lower court records that during this period he has already spent more than three years in custody. 5. The present appeal has been preferred on behalf of the parents of Fagu Mahto who has remained in custody till the 'final disposal of the trial from November 1996 to July 2000. It is apparent from the lower court records that during this period he has already spent more than three years in custody. The present appeal has been preferred on the grounds that the appellants though the parents-in-law have not committed any offence. It is also submitted in view of acquittal of appellants from major charges, the conviction under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is not mail1tainable. According to the learned, counsel for the appellants that no direct evidence is available on record showing Urmila Devi was ever tortured for dowry demands. It also mentions that the learned trial court has relied upon interested witnesses and did not consider in absence of I.O. and the doctor that adverse influence should have been drawn against the prosecution. As such, the appellants who have already remained in custody for nearly one and half years may be acquitted from charge. 6. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the contention on the grounds that the appellants are the parents in-law of the deceased Urmila Devi have participated in dowry demands. It is also submitted that their son Fagu Mahto has served the sentence and the appellants also deserves to be sent back to serve the term of sentence. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant strenuously argued before this Court that the entire prosecution story suffers from absurdity and contradictions in the evidence of interested witnesses. It is pointed out that the death of Urmila occurred in a natural circumstance and in absence of any medical evidence to support the prosecution story, the conviction under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the appellants drew my attention towards the fact that P.W. 1, P.W. 2, P.W. 4, P.W. 5 and P.W.6, are all the hearsay witnesses of the occurrence and alleged torture on the deceased. Learned counsel further pointed out that even if the prosecution story is believed the presence of these two appellants at the time of alleged death of Urmila stands contradicted vide para-9 of P.W. 1, and vide para-13 of P.W. 2. It was also asserted that none of the villagers of Baradih have supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel further pointed out that even if the prosecution story is believed the presence of these two appellants at the time of alleged death of Urmila stands contradicted vide para-9 of P.W. 1, and vide para-13 of P.W. 2. It was also asserted that none of the villagers of Baradih have supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel further pointed that P.W. 3 and P.W. 7 are the brother and father of the deceased. During cross-examination these witnesses have failed to say definitely when the dowry demands were made. According to the learned counsel for the appellant that even if their versions are believed, the dowry demands were never made by the appellants except Fagu Mahto, who has already served the period of sentence. My attention was drawn towards the admission of these two witnesses in cross-examination where they could not say when appellant Karmi Devi used to demand dowry and further tortured the deceased. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, the prosecution stands on mere suspicion just because they found Urmila dead. 8. Perused the evidence available in the case records alongwith the impugned judgment. It is admitted fact on record that Urmila was found dead in an unnatural circumstance within one and half years of the marriage. It is also apparent from the records that the witnesses have supported the prosecution version regarding the demand of dowry by appellant Fagu Mahto prior of the death of Urmila Devi. The appellants are the parents of Fagu Mahto and were residing with him prior to the occurrence. The learned lower court has found that these appellants alongwith their son Fagu Mahto guilty of charge under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code as the witnesses examined by the lower court have supported the story of dowry demands. P.W. 4 further asserted vide para10 that the dowry demands were made in his presence for which even Panchayati was held vide para-13. 9. On consideration of these facts and circumstances, that dowry demands were made from the informant and due to non-fulfillment of the same, Urmila lost her life. As such, I find and hold that the prosecution has able to bring home the charge under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants as well as their son Fagu Mahto beyond reasonable doubts. As such, I find and hold that the prosecution has able to bring home the charge under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants as well as their son Fagu Mahto beyond reasonable doubts. In such view of the facts, I find that the judgment and order of conviction of the appellants passed by the learned lower court deserves to be affirmed. In the result, the present appeal is found without merit and stands dismissed. 10. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that these two appellants have also remained in custody for more than 19 months during the trial of the case. It is also submitted that both the appellants are old and against whom no direct evidence is available for dowry demands. Therefore, the sentence may be modified to the period undergone. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has no objection. In such view of the facts, let the sentence be modified to the period already undergone. The two appellants are further discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds.