BIMAL GHOSH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal stems out the order of conviction and sentence passed against the accused persons for having committed offences under section 302/34 of the IPC and section 201/34 of the IPC convicting Bimal for imprisonment of life and both Siprarani and Kalidasi under section 201/34 of the IPC according to them the benefit of section 360 of the CRPC when this appeal for reversal of the order of conviction and sentence.

(2.) The Hon'ble Justice Sagir Ahmed in Ajit Savant Majagvai v, State of Karnataka 1997 SCC (Cri) 992 spoke for the bench that 'Battle of sexes has always been a battle of wits. Today it is denuded of its charms. It has degenerated into a war involving physical violence, torture, mental cruelty and murder of the female including partly the wife."

(3.) When we embark upon to scrutinise the authorship of the crime of the unfortunate story of torture and ill treatment, as alleged on Archana meated out to her which had resulted in her premature death at the hands of her relations and the appellant took a vow before the nuptial fire to be not only saviour but also guard her against all odds. In short, the vow or the promise so made by him attributed, in particular, to her husband who only acknowledged that he was the friend, philosopher and guide of his wife. The above vow which was fluid before the nuptial fire, in reality, followed in marital life in letter. It is the normal wear and tear in the marital life which is inevitable but the marital relationship came to a such pass that could lead to a death is unimaginable.