AFTAB HOSSAIN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal arises out of the judgement dtd. 27/9/2004 and the order of sentence dtd. 28/9/2004 as passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 2nd Court Midnapore, in Session Trial No. XXIII of August 2001 whereby and whereunder the said trial court in the said case found the accused persons guilty for committing offence under Ss. 498A/302/34 IPC and thus sentenced each of them to suffer RI for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.1000.00 i.d to suffer for six months for the offence committed by them under Sec. 498A IPC and also to suffer RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000.00 i.d to suffer RI of one year for the offence committed by them under Sec. 302 IPC with a further direction that all the substantive sentences of imprisonment would run concurrently . The convicts felt aggrieved and thus preferred the instant appeal. It is however pertinent to mention herein that during the pendency of the instant appeal, the present appellant no.3 Mst. Ashma Khatun @ Asheme Khatun has expired on 27/12/2019 and as such the instant appeal stood abetted as against her and such order of abetment was recorded by this Court vide order dtd. 28/2/2023. For effective disposal of the instant appeal, the facts leading to initiation of the aforesaid sessions trial is required to be discussed in a nutshell.

(2.) One Sk.Farhad Ali (PW1) of village Amrakuchi, PS Keshpur, Dist. Medinipur lodged a written complaint dated March 20,2001 with the I/C Kotwali P.S, Medinipur stating inter alia, that about four years back his daughter Sabina Khatun was given in marriage with Aftab Hossain (appellant no.1 herein) and thereafter for two years, both the bride and the groom led a happy conjugal life. It is the further version of the de-facto complainant that thereafter trouble started in the matrimonial home of his said daughter since the present three appellants being her husband, brother-in-law and mother-in- law started making quarrel and torture upon her daughter on account of demand of dowry of Rs.1.00 lakh which the de facto complainant could not fulfil on account of his financial stringency. It was the further version of the de facto complainant that for the non-fulfilment of such illegal demand his said daughter was frequently sent back to her paternal home however, with the expectation that everything would be in order in future the de facto complainant used to send her daughter to her matrimonial home with a request to the present three appellants not to make quarrel and torture on account of dowry. It has also been disclosed that 4-5 days prior to lodging of the FIR similar incident occurred and as usual the de facto complainant sent back his daughter to her paternal home. In the written complaint it has also been averred that on the last night at about 1:30 am one person being the head of the 'Moholla' (area) of Talpukur Colony intimated him over telephone that his said daughter Sabina Khatun was admitted at Medenipur Sadar Hospital with severe burn injury and after getting such information when he reached Midinipur Sadar Hospital he found his said daughter in totally ablazed condition and at that time his said daughter stated to him that it is none but her husband and her two in-laws i.e. the convicts of the aforementioned trial set fire on her person by pouring kerosene oil and thereafter his said injured daughter lost her sense. On the basis of such written complaint Kotwali P.S case no. 78/2001 dated March 20, 2001 under Ss. 498A/326/34 IPC was started. However, since the victim died on March 21,2001 Sec. 302 was added in the FIR as per prayer of the I.O. Investigation was taken up and on completion of the same charge sheet under Ss. 498A/ 302/34 IPC was filed as against the three appellants. Trial Court Record reveals that after commitment and transfer of the trial court record, learned trial court on April 22, 2002 considered the charges against the present three appellants and on perusal of the entire materials as placed before him, framed charges under Ss. 498A/302/34 IPC as against all the three accused persons. Trial court record reveals further that for bringing home the charges as against the three accused persons, the prosecution has examined 17 witnesses in all and several documents have been exhibited on their behalf. Though before the learned trial court the accused had adduced no evidence but from the trend of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and the answers as given by the accused persons in course of their respective examinations under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C, it would reveal that the defence case is based on false implication and clear denial.

(3.) For the sake of brevity we propose to categorize the prosecution witnesses in the following manner.