SATRAJIT RAI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above noted criminal appeals have been filed against the judgement and order dated passed by Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (E.C. Act), Gorakhpur in S.T. No. 69 of 2010 (State vs. Hridaya Rai) and S.T. No. 330 of 2010 (State vs. Satrajeet Rai and Another) under Ss. - 498-A, 304- B, 302/34 IPC and Sec. 3,4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Bansgaon, District- Gorakhpur, convicting and sentencing the appellants under Sec. 302/34 IPC to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo additional imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the deceased was married to the appellant, Hridaya Rai on 30/4/2008. The mediator of their marriage was co-accused, Satrajeet Rai and his wife, Smt. Nirmala Rai, who were related to the informant. Sufficient dowry in cash and household goods were given in the marriage for the couple but later the deceased came to know that her husband, appellant, Hridaya Rai, was having illicit relationship with co-accused, Smt. Nirmala Rai, which was known to co-accused, Satrajeet Rai also but he never protested against the same. The appellant used to lookafter the business of co-accused, Satrajeet Rai and give his earning to him also. He neglected to look after the deceased, his wife. The deceased informed her family members about these facts and also that accused persons are demanding Rs.1.00 lac more towards the dowry and are harassing her and threatening to cause her murder. The deceased gave birth to a child and her harassment further increased. On 2/9/2009 at about 10:00 p.m the accused persons badly beated the deceased and after pouring kerosene oil over her put her on fire. On hearing her cries her father-in-law, Vinay Rai, brother-in-law, Amresh Rai, sister-in-law, Niti Rai and brother of her father-in-law, Ramakant Rai, and other villagers came and after opening the main door of the house took out the three accused. Family members of her matrimonial home took her to the hospital in burnt condition and information was given to the informant on the next day. Thereafter, the F.I.R was lodged by the informant which was registered as Case Crime No. 500 of 2009, under Ss. - 498-A, 304-B, 511 IPC and Sec. 3, 4 of D.P. Act.

(3.) After framing of the charges the prosecution examined P.W.-1, Parvati Devi, grand-mother of deceased; P.W.-2, Asha Devi, mother of deceased; P.W.-3, Kumari Bacchi Rai, sister of deceased. All of them admitted marriage of the deceased with appellant, Hridaya Rai, but did not supported the allegations regarding demand of dowry and harassment of the deceased for the same. P.W.-4, Medical Officer, Mahila Chikitsalaya, Gorakhpur, proved the post-mortem report of the deceased stated that her death could have been caused by the burn injuries. P.W.-5, Sunil Kumar, Naib Tehsildar, proved that he was posted in Sadar Hospital, Gorakhpur and dying declaration of the deceased was recorded in his presence. He took down the dying declaration in his own hand writing and he got the right thumb impression of the deceased affixed on her dying declaration which was attested by the doctor on duty. He also proved that before recording of the dying declaration doctor on duty checked the deceased and found her in full senses and competent to get her dying declaration recorded. When he reached the hospital the deceased was in full senses. He had removed all her relatives away at the time of recording of her dying declaration. P.W.-6, Dr. Anand Bodh, certified that prior to the recording of dying declaration of deceased, he found her in full senses and capable of getting her statement recorded. He proved his certificate of fitness before the trial court and her right thumb impression on the dying declaration.