NABA KUMAR MANDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed from the order of conviction and sentence dated 5th September, 2006 and 6th September 2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Birbhum at Rampurhat, in Sessions Trial No. 6 of February, 2001 arising out of Sessions Case No.83 of 1993 whereby and whereunder the accused appellant was convicted under Sections 498A and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to suffer imprisonment for further two years for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and to suffer imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to suffer further six months under Section 498A I.P.C. The said sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that an F.I.R. was lodged by P.W.1 brother of the victim girl with Mayureswar Police Station on 26th September, 1991 alleging that the victim was married to the accused appellant on 25th May, 1991. Since her marriage the victim was subjected to torture and the said was narrated by her to the de facto complainant and other inmates of her parental home. On 26th September, 1991, the accused appellant through one Gour Mondal informed the de facto complainant that some unknown miscreants had come to their house and killed the victim girl and fled away thereafter by taking ear-rings and nose-ring. This was not believed by him as his firm belief was that the victim was brutally murdered by the accused appellant. On the basis of such complaint received, Mayureswar P.S. Case No. 132/91 was initiated and investigation undertaken. An inquest was made on the body of the victim so also post mortem conducted and reports filed. Thereafter, the investigation culminated in issuance of a Charge sheet and the matter committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Birbhum at Suri.

(3.) Thereafter, the case was transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Birbhum at Rampurhat. Charges were framed and read over and explained to the accused appellants, who initially were six in number, each of them pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Trial thereafter started and on behalf of the Prosecution 14 witnesses were examined. Documents were also exhibited and proved. No witness was examined by the defence. But the accused appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on a consideration of the evidence-both oral and documentary, the order of conviction and sentence was passed.