Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1410 (PAT)

Birendra Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar

2013-12-09

ANJANA PRAKASH

body2013
JUDGMENT Smt. Anjana Prakash, J. - The appellants have been convicted under Section 498-A, 304-B, 201 and 420, IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304-B, IPC and two years under Section 498-A, IPC by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, passed by a judgment and order of conviction dated 12/17.4.2001 in Sessions Trial No. 545/1999/116 of 1999. 2. The case of the informant was that his daughter Swarn Lata Devi was married to accused Kailash Prasad Singh but the in-laws used to demand additional dowry. After marriage of 3-4 months, accused Kailash Prasad Singh had come to his village and told him that a land was being sold next to his house and asked for a sum of Rs. 50,000/-. He stated that he was himself in financial difficulty at which he returned to his village very angry. On 30.4.1992, the accused persons came to him for the said amount at which he paid them Rs. 50,000/- in presence of co-villagers. When the informant started demanding return of the said money, his daughter was tortured and assaulted. They also demanded some more articles. On 10.5.1997 he went to the village of the deceased but the in-laws did not permit him to meet her and told that his daughter went missing since 31.10.1997. 3. During trial, the Prosecution examined 19 witnesses. Prosecution witness No. 1 i.e. Angad Prasad Singh, PW 8 Mirtunjay Paswan, PW 9 Arvind Singh, PW 10 Arun Singh, PW 11 Buta Singh, PW 12 Ganga Pd. Singh stated that in 1996, accused Kailash Singh with his wife went for Delhi and thereafter, never returned. PW 2 Syaram Singh, PW 3 Jai Ram Singh, PW 4 Ram Bilash Singh, PW 5 Nawal Kishore Singh, PW 6 Guna Nand Singh, PW 7 Chalo Singh were declared, hostile by the Prosecution. PW 13 Ashutosh Mandal is the brother of the deceased whereas' PW 14 Gorelal Mandal is the informant and PW 15 Srikant Singh and PW 16 Ram Suresh Singh are the Investigating Officers. PW 17 Sakaldeep Mandal, PW 18 Doman Thakur and PW 19 Prabhakar Singh are on the point that the accused persons had demanded 50,000/- rupees from the informant. 4. The Defence of the appellants was that the deceased had been living in Delhi with her husband and disappeared from there. PW 17 Sakaldeep Mandal, PW 18 Doman Thakur and PW 19 Prabhakar Singh are on the point that the accused persons had demanded 50,000/- rupees from the informant. 4. The Defence of the appellants was that the deceased had been living in Delhi with her husband and disappeared from there. The present appellants who are maternal uncle, mother-in-law and father-in-law have no role to play in the occurrence. 5. PW 13 Ashutosh Mandal, brother of the deceased, stated merely to the effect that his sister had gone missing from the house of her in-laws. 6. The informant gave a hear-say account that the in-laws had killed his daughter. The Investigating Officer proved the fact that the appellants had produced a document before him to show that they had lodged a report with regard to the disappearance of Swarn Lata. Thus, it appears that apart from the material that the daughter of the informant had gone missing, there is no cogent material with regard to her death. The co-villagers of the appellant had stated that they only knew that the alleged deceased had gone to Delhi 'with her husband, but, never returned. Thus, it appears that apart from a vague suspicion that the appellants might have caused the death of the deceased, there is no cogent material against them. 7. In absence of any substantial evidence that the death of the daughter of the informant had been caused within seven years of her marriage for ends of dowry for which she had been tortured before her death, it would be unsafe to maintain the conviction of the present appellant. 8. Hence, giving benefit of doubt to the appellants, the appeal is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence dated 12/17.4.2001 passed against the appellants by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, in Sessions Trial No.545 of 1999/11 G of 1999 is, hereby, set aside. 9. The appellants are discharged from the liabilities of their respective bail bonds. Appeal allowed.