SANJIB NATH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sanjib Nath together with his father Joydev Nath since deceased and his mother Shrimati Mina Nath, pursuant to a written complaint dated 2nd September, 2002 lodged by Shri Debashish Sarkar which formed the basis of a formal FIR were charged for inflicting physical and mental torture upon Shrimati Sampa Nath under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and for committing murder of the said Shrimati Sampa Nath by setting her on fire after pouring kerosene oil on her body under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. During the pendency of the trial the accused Joydev Nath, father-in-law of the victim died. Shrimati Mina Nath, mother-in-law of the victim Shrimati Sampa Nath and the husband of the victim were acquitted of the charges under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Shrimati Mina Nath was also acquitted of the charge under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Shri Sanjib Nath was however found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and was also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default to suffer six months further rigorous imprisonment. The convict Sanjib Nath has come up in appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution briefly stated is that at 1. 30 A.M. on 2nd September, 2002 Shri Debashish Sarkar the maternal uncle of the victim, upon being informed by Papiya, a relation of Shri Sanjib Nath, went to the house of the victim and found her lying on the floor with severe burns. Her hands were tied. She was screaming in pain. She told him that her husband and his parents asked her to die. Upon protest by the victim they jointly poured kerosene oil on her and ignited with a lamp. There are allegations of continuous torture both physically and mentally upon the deceased ever since she was married to the accused Sanjib. The case of the defence is however plain and simple denial.

(3.) The only point which arises for our determination is whether the charge under Section 302 for which the appellant has been punished was brought home by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.