EKADASHI NAYAK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appeal is directed against judgement and order dated 28/29.10.2009 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 2nd Court, Haldia, Purba Medinipore, in Sessions Trial No. 4(2)/08 coresponding to Sessions Case No. 20(Nov.)/2008 arising out of Mahishadal Police Station Cae No. 51 of 2006 dated 23.10.2006 convicting the appellant for commission of offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a further period of two years.

(2.) The prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellant is to the effect that in the month of baisakh in the year 2006 the victim Urmila was married to the appellant according to Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage cash of Rs.33,000/-, ornaments and other household articles were given to the appellant as dowry. After the marriage the victim was subjected to mental and physical torture on further demands of dowry. On 23.10.2006, in the morning father of the victim Gokul Chandra Samanta, the de facto complainant, was informed that the appellant and the in-laws assaulted the victim and as a result she had died. He rushed to the matrimonial home and found the dead body of her daughter lying in the balcony of the house. The appellant confessed that in the night between 22/23.10.2006 he assaulted Urmila and when she became senseless, he hanged her with her sari at their balcony and as a result the victim died. On the basis of the written complaint of the father of the victim viz. Gokul Chandra Samanta a specific case being Mahishadal Police Station Case No. 51 of 2006 dated 23.10.2006 under Section 498A/304B/302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellant and the in-laws i.e. father-in-law and mother-in-law of the victim. In conclusion of investigation charge-sheet was filed against the appellant and the two accused persons under Sections 498A/304B/302/34/201 of the Indian Penal Code. The case being a sessions triable one was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 2nd Court, Haldia, Purba Medinipore for trial and disposal and charges were framed under Section 498A/304B/302/34/201 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant and other two accused persons. Prosecution examined seven witnesses in support of their case and exhibited number of documents. The defence of the appellant and two other accused persons was one of innocence and false implication. It was the specific defence of the appellant that there was an altercation over frying of an egg at the matrimonial home between him and the victim and thereafter the victim had committed suicide. In support of such plea, the appellant examined himself and another witness as defence witness. In conclusion of trial the trial judge by judgement and order dated 28.10.2009 and 29.10.2009 convicted the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him as aforesaid. However, learned trial judge acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and other accused persons of all the charges levelled against them.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the evidence on record does not show that the victim was subjected to torture on account of dowry. He submits there was an altercation over domestic issues between the appellant and the victim and thereafter the victim committed suicide. The opinion of the autopsy surgeon, P.W. 7, is confusing and does not establish homicidal death beyond reasonable doubt. Without prejudice to the aforesaid submissions, he alternatively submits that even if the prosecution case of assault is believed in view of quarrel by and between the victim at the time of incident case of murder of the housewife punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out. He relied on various authorities in support of such contention.