ANANTA BHOWMIK Vs. PRAFULLYA MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application has been filed by Ananta Bhowmik, the de-facto complainant in Balurghat police station case No. 53 of 1999 dated 11.2.1999 challenging the legality, validity and propriety of the judgment and order of acquittal dated 22.7.2003 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshin Dinajpur at Balurghat in Sessions Case No. 25/2001 (Sessions Trial No. 11/01) whereby the opposite parties/accused were acquitted from the charges under Sections 498A/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) That Balurghat police Station Case No. 53/99 dated 11.2.1999 was initiated by the Petitioner against the opposite parties alleging therein that Amita Mondal, daughter of de-facto complainant Ananta Mondal was given marriage with opposite party No. 2 Dilip Mondal in the year 1991. In their wedlock, one female child was born. After birth of the said female child Amita was subjected to crulty in her matrimonial house by the opposite parties who demanded cash of Rs. 20,000/-, television sets and other articles. She was beaten frequently by them for that purpose. Opposite party Laksmi Mondal instigated her to commit suicide by taking poison. Opposite party Anil Mondal had beaten her in presence of her husband opposite party Dilip Mondal. Amita, since deceased, informed everything to her elder sister Anita and their father Ananta Bhowmik. Ananta Bhowmik was asked by opposite party Dilip to pay him Rs. 13,000/- within two/three months. Ananta upon receiving such phone call, had been to the house of opposite party and paid Rs. 5000/-. On 11.2.1999, at about 5 P.M. Ananta Bhowmik came to know that Amita sustained burn injury and was admitted in Balurghat hospital. Upon his reaching there, he came to know from Anita that the opposite parties sprinkled kerosine oil on her body and put her on fire. Ananta lodged one FIR with Balurghat police station on 11.2.1999 without delay and, accordingly, the case stated. Anita Mondal died on 25.2.1999 at 1.50 A.M. The investigation ended in a charge-sheet under Sections 498A/302/34 of IPC against all the opposite parties. The learned Trial Court framed charges under Sections 498A/302/34 of IPC against all the opposite parties who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the trial commenced. In all, 28 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Some documents, such as, seizure lists, letters written by Anita, the FIR, the inquest report, dying declaration, death information, FIR in respect of unnatural death, post mortem report, hospital record, injury report and sketch map of the place of occurrence were admitted into evidence and marked Exs. on behalf of the prosecution. No witness was examined on behalf of the defense nor any document was filed and admitted into evidence on behalf of the defense. Upon consideration of the evidence on record, oral and documentary, the learned Court found that the prosecution failed to bring home the charges leveled against the opposite parties and, accordingly, recorded their acquittal. The de-facto complainant Ananta Bhowmik has come with this application for revision of the judgment impugned on the following grounds:

(3.) The points to be decided in this revision application are whether the judgment and order under challenge are sustainable in law and whether this is a proper case where this Court should exercise its revisional jurisdiction and thereby set aside the judgment impugned and direct retrial/rehearing of the case.