JUDGMENT : RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J. 1. This appeal arose out of a judgment and order dated 15th December, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 1st Court, Berhampore, Murshidabad in Session Serial Case no. 565 of 2004 (Session Trial no. 15(12)/2004) convicting the appellants under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each; in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 1st September, 2003 at 18.05 hours one Tenu Sk., son of Sabdul Sk of village Shialmara, P.S. Berhampore, Murshidabad lodged a complaint at Berhampore Police Station alleging that the marriage of his daughter Jarina Bibi was solemnized with the accused Sajibar @ Mujibar Sk of village Udaychandpur as per Muslim rites and customs about four years back. After marriage his daughter started residing at her in-law's house with the accused persons, where she was subjected to cruelty by her husband and also father and brother of her husband both physically and mentally without any reason. The accused persons used to declare that they had no need of such housewife. While Jarina Bibi used to come to her father's house, she disclosed to her parents about the fact of torture upon her by the accused persons. On 31st August, 2003 at about 5.00 p.m. she was taken back to her in-law's house by her mother and kept her there. On the date of incident the mother of Jarina bibi came back to their house in village Shialmara at about 8.00 a.m. and got an information through the people that their daughter died by consuming poison. On receipt of the said information they reached to the in-law's house of Jarina Bibi in village Udaychandpur and found their daughter was lying dead. Jarina Bibi was compelled to commit suicide by consuming poison, as she could not bear the torture upon her by the accused persons. 3. On the basis of the written complaint, a criminal case, being Berhampore P.S. Case no. 269/2003 dated 1st September, 2003 was initiated against the accused persons. Investigation was started and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Murshidabad, Berhampore. 3. On the basis of the written complaint, a criminal case, being Berhampore P.S. Case no. 269/2003 dated 1st September, 2003 was initiated against the accused persons. Investigation was started and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Murshidabad, Berhampore. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Murshidabad at Berhampore and during proceeding charge was framed under Sections 498A/34 and 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused person, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. It appears from the order dated 5th May, 2016 that the appellant no.2, Samad Sk. expired on 13th August, 2013 and as such the instant appeal was abated against the appellant no.2, Samad Sk. 5. Mr. Kallol Mondal, learned advocate for the appellants submitted that the First Information Report was not read over to the complainant being P.W.1 by the scribe P.W.9. He further submitted that the entire dispute arose, as the deceased did not like her husband as his one eye was blind. There was contradiction between the statement of the prosecution witnesses regarding the manner and reason of torture. P.W.3 for the first time introduced the allegation of demand of dowry before the Court and not during investigation. P.W.4 stated in his deposition regarding assault upon the deceased seven days prior to her death, which was not stated during investigation and was not corroborated by other witnesses. He also submitted that the prosecution failed to establish the case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code either by oral evidence or documentary evidence. He further submitted that from the statements recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure it appears that the deceased did not take her one-eyed husband happily and when she frequently visited her parent's house, she disclosed her dissatisfaction. P.W.2, mother of the deceased admitted by her deposition that her daughter used to consider herself as an unfortunate woman as being a wife of blind person and by not tolerating such insult, her daughter committed suicide by taking poison. He further submitted that the learned Trial Judge ought to have considered that there was no ingredient of commission of an offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. He further submitted that the learned Trial Judge ought to have considered that there was no ingredient of commission of an offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. He also pointed out that the learned Judge was pleased to acquit the charge under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants. The learned Judge also acquitted the accused Sajahan Sk under Section 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code. Lastly, he submitted that the appellant no.1 was arrested on 2nd September, 2003 and was granted bail on 23rd October, 2003, but the High Court cancelled the bail and the appellant no.1 was again arrested on 25th November, 2017 and till date he is in custody. Thus, he has prayed that the appellant no.1 may be released. 6. Learned advocate for the State submitted that death of the victim occurred within four years of her marriage as evident from the First Information Report and as such the learned Judge ought to have recorded the order of conviction under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Though the Investigating Officer initiated the proceeding under Section 498A/304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and charge sheet was submitted under the aforesaid sections, but subsequently charge was framed under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. She submitted that the evidence as to the torture upon the victim by the appellant has been proved by the prosecution witnesses. The specific evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 is that the accused persons caused her death after torturing and assaulting her. She also submitted that from the evidence on record it is found that the prosecution has been able to prove the fact that Jarina Bibi died in her in-law's house within seven years from her marriage by committing suicide by taking poison as she could not bear the torture done upon her by her husband, father-in-law and brother-in-law both mentally and physically, which drove her to commit suicide and as such the torture upon the unfortunate lady must come under the purview of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Thus, she prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the impugned judgment. 8. In the instant case the prosecution examined as many as twelve witnesses to substantiate the charge of cruelty. 9. Thus, she prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the impugned judgment. 8. In the instant case the prosecution examined as many as twelve witnesses to substantiate the charge of cruelty. 9. P.W.1, Tenu Sk., father of the deceased as well as the complainant deposed in his evidence in chief that after marriage of her daughter Jarina Bibi, she was subjected to both mental and physical torture by her husband and she was not allowed to take her normal food by her husband and even she was not treated by any Doctor when she used to become sick. Her husband also used to tell her that she would collect the required money for her treatment from her father and she was thus subjected to mental torture. He further deposed that 3/4 months before her death, Samad Sk, father-in-law used to assault her and after the last day of assault on her by her father-in-law she was not allowed to take her food on that date. She came to the house of P.W.1 and narrated the said incident to them. Thereafter, after lapse of three days her father-in-law came to her father's house and on being asked her father-in-law admitted that he assaulted Jarina Bibi as she did not obey his instruction. Her father-in-law also admitted before P.W.1 that by not providing food to Jarina he committed wrong. Just before five days from the date of her death, Jarina again came to the house of P.W.1 and thereafter, after lapse of three days, her brother-in-law (bhasur) Sajahan Sk. came to the house of P.W.1 for bringing back Jarina, but Jarina was not sent back to her in-law's house with accused Sajahan Sk. Thereafter, after lapse of three days Jarina was sent back to her in-law's house accompanied by her mother and on the very next day morning after returning back of her mother from her in-law's house, she committed suicide by taking poison at her in-law's house. He further deposed that soon after getting the death news of his daughter, he rushed to the house of in-laws of his daughter and found his daughter lying dead on a chouki. Thereafter, he along with his brother came to Berhampore P.S. and lodged a written complaint before the I.C., Berhampore Sadar P.S. The complaint was written by one Sabjan Sk as per his instruction. Thereafter, he along with his brother came to Berhampore P.S. and lodged a written complaint before the I.C., Berhampore Sadar P.S. The complaint was written by one Sabjan Sk as per his instruction. The contents of the complaint were not read over to him by Sabjan Sk, but he put signature on the same. 10. P.W.2, Foizum Bibi, mother of the deceased, P.W.3, Rafikul Sk., paternal uncle of the deceased and P.W.4, Farid Sk., neighbour of the father of the deceased at the time of their examination corroborated the statement of P.W.1. 11. P.W.5, Mukti Singha, Home Guard of Berhampore P.S. deposed that he brought one dead body of Jarina Bibi from Udaychandpur to the police morgue for post mortem and after examination by the concerned Medical Officer, he took the dead body through challan. 12. P.W.6, P. Bhattacharya, Sub-Inspector of Police deposed that on the date of incident he received a written complaint from one Tenu Sk and on the basis of which he registered Berhampore P.S. Case no.269 of 2003 dated 1st September, 2003 under Section 498A/306 of the Indian Penal Code. 13. P.W.7, Dr. Somnath Bhattacharya, deposed that he was attached to Berhampore Mental Hospital and conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of Jarina Bibi, wife of Sajibur Sk @ Mujibar Sk, aged about 25 years and on examination he found that one ecchymosis over the left mantible about 2"x 1" and one ecchymosis over the right neck about 1"x 1/2", which showed that the death was unnatural. 14. P.W.8, Abu Ahammed, Investigating Officer of this case deposed that after taking the charge of investigation he arranged for conducting inquest report on the dead body of Jarina Bibi by the Executive Magistrate. He recorded the statement of the available witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and arrested the accused persons. After investigation he submitted charge sheet against three accused persons for commission of offence under Section 498A/306 of the Indian Penal Code. 15. P.W.9, Sabjan Sk., Advocate's clerk, who had written the complaint as per instruction of P.W.1, corroborated the said fact. 16. P.W.10, Sairekha Bibi, P.W.11, Jabed Sk and P.W.12, Alamgir Sk, who were the residents of village Udaychandpur, were not examined by the prosecution but tendered them for cross-examination and declined. 17. 15. P.W.9, Sabjan Sk., Advocate's clerk, who had written the complaint as per instruction of P.W.1, corroborated the said fact. 16. P.W.10, Sairekha Bibi, P.W.11, Jabed Sk and P.W.12, Alamgir Sk, who were the residents of village Udaychandpur, were not examined by the prosecution but tendered them for cross-examination and declined. 17. On perusal of the evidence on record it appears that it was the specific case of the prosecution that cruelty and torture was made by the accused persons/appellants upon the victim Jarina Bibi, for which Jarina committed suicide on 1st September, 2003 in her in-law's house within four years from the date of her marriage. It is found that Jarina Bibi committed suicide by taking poison as she could not bear the torture done upon her by her husband, father-in-law, brother-in-law (bhasur) both mentally and physically, which drove her to commit suicide. As discussed above, P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4, who were the father, mother, paternal uncle and neighbour of the father of the deceased, stated that the victim complained of torture by the appellants whenever she visited her house. The evidence made by P.W.1 to P.W.4 was admitted by the appellants. Moreover, from their evidence it is found that they got news through a minor boy that Jarina Bibi consumed poison and died and on receipt of the said news they rushed to the in-law's house of Jarina and found she was lying dead at the house of the accused persons. In the instant case, the statement made by P.W.1 to P.W.4 goes to show that soon before her death the deceased was subjected to cruelty or torture by the appellants. 18. It is a fact that the victim committed suicide within seven years of her marriage. Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as follows: "113A. In the instant case, the statement made by P.W.1 to P.W.4 goes to show that soon before her death the deceased was subjected to cruelty or torture by the appellants. 18. It is a fact that the victim committed suicide within seven years of her marriage. Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as follows: "113A. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman- When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband. Explanation For the purposes of this section, "cruelty" shall have the same meaning as in Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code." 19. The said provision provides that Court may draw in the light of attending circumstances a statutory presumption of abetment of suicide in the event a housewife commits suicide within seven years of marriage provided she was subjected to cruelty by her husband and other in-laws. In the instant case, cruelty and torture upon the victim in her in-law's house have been well proved by the prosecution and accordingly, the accused persons were convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, I uphold the order of conviction passed by the learned Judge under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. 20. I find that the appellant no.2 expired and the appellant no.1 is in jail almost 1 & 1/2 years. In my view, since the appellant no.1 is one-eyed man and he is serving his sentence almost 1 & 1/2 years, his sentence should be reduced by six months. Therefore, the appellant no.1 is released, if he is not required in connection with any other case. 21. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. 22. Copy of the judgment along with Lower Court Records be sent down to the trial court at once for necessary compliance. 23. Therefore, the appellant no.1 is released, if he is not required in connection with any other case. 21. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. 22. Copy of the judgment along with Lower Court Records be sent down to the trial court at once for necessary compliance. 23. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all necessary legal formalities.