KARTICK CHANDRA SAHA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of conviction passed by Sri P.S. Mukherjee, Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Barasat, 24 Parganas (North) whereby convicting the appellants namely Kartick Chandra Saha, Sukla Saha, Swapna Saha and Soma Saha under Section 498A of I.P.C.

(2.) A thumbnail sketch of the prosecution case is that on 24.10.1992 a verbal complaint was lodged with Belghoria P.S. to that effect that in the year 1985 the marriage between daughter of the defacto complainant Gita Saha and Kartick Saha of Ramkrishna Pally was solemnized at Kalighat in presence of the some of the witnesses and son of the defacto complainant Madhu Das. At the time of marriage Kartick Saha demanded some golden ornaments and cash. The same was fulfilled. After 3 to 4 months of marriage Gita was subjected to torture both mentally and physically and also abused by her in mates in her in-laws house. Occasionally Gita could not bear the torture so she used to come to the house of the defacto complainant and disclosed before her mother that she was unable to bear the torture any more. In the morning of 23.10.1992 mother-in-law and sister-in-law began severe torture upon Gita and they also tried to drive her away from her maternal house and compel her to commit suicide. As a result on the same night at about 01.00 hrs. Gita set herself on fire by pouring kerosene oil on her person. She was taken to the hospital where she succumbed to the burn injury. On the basis of verbal complaint police took up investigation of the case and after completion of investigation submitted a charge sheet under Section 498A/306/304B I.P.C. Hence the prosecution case.

(3.) OUT of the 21 witnesses examined in the instant case P.W. 1 Janaki Das happens to be defacto complainant of the case. P.W. 2 Madhu Das, was the son of the defacto complainant. P.W. 3 Kabita Karmakar, P.W. 4 Jayanta Roy, P.W. 5 Madhu Patra, P.W. 6 Sujit Halder, P.W. 7 Nilima Paul, P.W. 8 Anil Paul, P.W. 9 Chaitali Chakraborty, P.W. 11 Sneha Lata Jana, P.W. 12 Amal Manna. P.W. 13 Hari Pada Jana, P.W. 14 Jayanta Jana, P.W. 15 Sudhin Roy, P.W. 16 Dipak Chanda, P.W. 17 Anjana Biswas all are independent witnesses and resident of Ramkrishna Pally. P.W. 18 was S.I. of Police and he at the very outset I like to mention that is a very very formal witness. He has recorded First Information Report on the basis of the verbal complaint lodged by P.W. 1. During the course of the cross-examination P.W. 18 practically admitted that he has not mentioned in the F.I.R. that he procured L.T.I. of defacto complainant (P.W. 1) and also there is no endorsement in the F.I.R. that same was drafted as per the verbal statement of P.W. 1 i.e. mother of Gita. P.W. 19, a police Constable who took the dead body from the R.G. Kar Medical College to N.R.S. Medical College and Hospital for holding post-mortem examination and he has no personal knowledge of the occurrence. P.W. 20 who performed the inquest of the dead body of Gita Saha and according to him Gita sustained 100 per cent burn injury. Though during the course of the cross-examination he admitted that he did not know the method as to how the percentage of burn injury was calculated. P.W. 21 is the I.O. of this case.