JANARDHAN DEBNATH Vs. THE STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DOWRY is a serious social evil. An offence of dowry death is a most hated crime. The Legislature has made stringent laws to deal with the devilish acts of dowry by enacting the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and incorporating in the Penal Code too, Section 498A and Section 304B as well as Section 113B in the Evidence Act. The menace of dowry still survives. What needs to be borne in mind is that howsoever serious a charge may be against an accused, the offence alleged to have been committed by him must be proved in accordance with law. The Court of law should not be swayed simply by the gravity of the offence but should consider the case as a whole and should not draw assumption and presumption based on his common sense putting apart the facts brought in evidence by the parties. No doubt, in cases of offence relating to woman the role of the Courts assumes significant importance. The Supreme Court in the case of Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam and Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in : (1993) 2 SCC 684 : 1993 Cri.L.J. 1635 has held that the role of courts, under the circumstances assumes greater importance and it is expected that the courts would deal with such cases in a more realistic manner and not allow the criminals to escape on account of procedural technicalities or insignificant lacunae in the evidence as otherwise the criminals would receive encouragement and the victims of crime would be totally discouraged by the crime going unpunished. The courts are expected to be sensitive in cases involving crime against women.

(2.) HERE is a case, the accused -appellant has been convicted for dowry death. The marriage of accused -appellant, Janardhan Debnath was solemnized with Sangita Debnath about four years before her death(death occurred on 10.10.2010). It is an undisputed rather an admitted fact that Sangita died an unnatural death on receipt of 96 percent burn injury all over her body. According to the prosecution, she was subjected to cruelty in the matrimonial home on demand of dowry. On the other hand the accused persons contended that the deceased was accidentally caught with fire and as a result she died.

(3.) BASED on the F.I.R. Santirbazar P.S. Case No. 73 of 2010 was registered under Sections 498A and 304B of IPC and initially investigation was taken up by S.I. Dipu Deb Barma (P.W. 15) but subsequently investigation was done by SDPO Amitabha Pal (P.W. 16) and he laid the charge sheet against accused -appellant, Janardhan Debnath, his mother Sandhya Rani Debnath, sister Manika Debnath and husband of Manika, namely Pradip Debnath, arraying them as accused for commission of offence punishable under Section 498A and 304B of IPC.