(1.) The challenge here is the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 18.02.2017, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura Judicial District, Sonamura whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code,hereinafter referred to as 'IPC' and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-with default stipulation.
(2.) The prosecution case against the appellant was launched on the basis of a complaint dated 14.05.2015 lodged to the Officer-In-Charge of Sonamura Police Sation revealingthat the complainant namely Purnima Rani Natta Das (PW 1) had received an information from one Santimoy Sarkar (PW 26) that her daughter was killed and her body was set on firein her husband's house. Said Santimoy Sarkar had received the said information from one unknown person. She lodged the complaint against the husband of her daughter namely Tapas Natta, father-in-law Dasharath Natta,mother-in-law,Manju Natta andsister-in-law,Laxmi Natta.In her complaint she stated that as per demand of the accused persons at the time of marriage they gave Rs.50,000/-cash,gold ornaments worth of Rs. 1,00,000/-and all types of furniture. Initially the marriage was happy and peaceful for about 4to 5 months. Afterwards, the husband i.e. the appellant used to pressurize her daughter,Shipra Natta Das expressing his desire to marry again because he was involved in an illicit relationship with another girl. On 14.05.2015 her daughter was some how killed and thereafter set her body on fire. A meeting was held at the house of her husband to resolve the disputes between the appellant and her daughter a few days before the said date of occurrence. It was also mentioned in the FIR that at the time of death her daughter was carrying 3 months pregnancy.
(3.) Charge was framed against all the accused persons separately. The appellant was charged under Section 302 and 201 of IPC. Against Dasharath Natta Das and Smt. Manju Rani Natta, the learned trial Judge had framed charges under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 109 of IPC.