HEMANTA KOLEY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and orders of conviction and sentences passed by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Hooghly in Sessions Trial Case No. 75/1988. Charge was framed against the appellant/accused under 3 heads, one under section 302 IPC for murder of his wife Malati Koley, the other under section 201 IPC for causing disappearance of certain evidence of the said offence and the third one under section 498A IPC for subjecting his wife Malati Koley, since deceased, to physical torture. The learned trial Judge convicted the appellant under all the heads of charge and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life for his conviction under section 302 IPC and also a fine of Rs. 2,000/- i.e. to R.I. for 6 months. He also sentenced the appellant to R.I. for 7 years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- i.d. to R.I. for 1 year for his conviction under section 201 IPC and also to R.I. for 3 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- i.d. to R.I. for 3 months for his conviction under section 498A IPC with the direction that all the substantive sentences will run concurrently. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentences the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) The FIR was lodged by P.W.1 Anil Kr. Das, the elder brother of the deceased Maliti at Chanditala P.S. on 3.12.86 at 12-15 p.m. In the FIR it is stated that his sister Malati and the accused Hemanta Koley were married in the month of Jaistha, 1393 B.S. and they used to live together at Jagannathbati village while her mother-in-law, her husband's elder brother and sisters used to reside in the house of the maternal uncle of the accused in Mashat-Kadamtala and that in the month of Bhadra last his sister's mother-in-law came to her house on the occasion of 'Pitha Parban' and at that time his sister was unwell and could not do the work of 'Pitha Parban' and on this pretext the accused assaulted his wife severely and since then the accused often used to assault and even did not give her food etc. It is further stated that only 15 days back the accused brought his wife at Gangadharpur Bazar by bus and left her there stating that she should bring the gold necklace when she would come back home otherwise she would not be allowed to enter the house and he did not accompany his wife to the house of the informant and that 7 days back the sister of the informant went back to her husband's house accompanied by her third brother Chandu and on 3.12.86, that is, the date on which the FIR was lodged, at about 8-00 a.m., Bacharam Santra, the maternal uncle of the accused came to the house of informant and stated that the sister of the informant could not be traced out and on hearing this news the informant alongwith his nephew Banbehari Das (P.W.2) and mother went to Jagannathbati and found that his sister was lying dead in the courtyard in front of the room of the accused and they came to know from Mohan Adak (P.W.8) and other persons of the village that at first the accused said to the people of the village that she might have been drowned in the pond and then Mohan Adak, Sibhu Hati and Sukdev Bag got down into the water and traced out and lifted the dead body of Malati from the water and placed the dead body on the courtyard of the accused. In the FIR it is also stated that mark was seen on the chest of the dead body and on being asked the accused confessed that on that day, that is, 3.12.86 at day break he strangled Malati to death and threw her in the pond.

(3.) P.W.1 Anil Kr. Das is the informant who lodged the FIR. He speaks about the marriage of his sister Malati with the appellant accused. He says that after marriage his sister used to live in her matrimonial home and for about one year they lived happily and there-after the trouble arose. He further says that the mother and sister of the accused used to live sometime in the house of the accused and some time in the house of his maternal uncle at Moshat. He says that the accused Hemanta did not provide his sister with proper food and also did not maintain her properly. His evidence is that on the date of death of her sister, the maternal uncle of the accused came to their house and enquired whether her sister had come to their house at 7-00 a.m. and told that she was missing and also asked him to go to the house of the accused and then he and his nephew Banbehari went to the house of the accused and about 10/15 minutes thereafter his mother Smt. Aloka Das (P.W.3), his brother Chandu and his older brother's wife Renukabala Das and the wife of Chandu Smt. Chhabirani Das went to the house of the accused and they reached the house of the accused by 8-00 a.m. and saw that the dead body of Malati was lying on the courtyard. He speaks of the existence of a 'ghat' by the side of the courtyard of the accused. According to his evidence, the accused Hemanta was not in the house (at that time). He saw marks of red acchymosis on two sides of her breast and on her throat. He further says that they brought one doctor from Krishna Rampur market and the doctor after examining her told that Malati was murdered by throttling. In his cross-examination he says that the accused Hemanta is a hawker and he used to sell stationary goods in the villages. P.W.2 Banbehari Das is the nephew of P.W.1. He says in his examination-in-chief that the accused has good relationship with his wife Malati. His evidence is that more than 6 years back in the month of Aghrayan at about 9-00 a.m. P.W.1 Anil told him to accompany him as his sister was missing and then he and P.W.1 went to the house of the accused on cycle and the mother of Anil and others also went to the house of the accused later. He says that on going to the house of the accused they saw that Malati was kept lying on the courtyard and froths mixed with blood were coming our of her mouth and he also saw 5/6 red acchymosis on her chest and he became suspicious. He also speaks about coming of a local doctor to the place. He says that on going to his dispensary, he asked the doctor about his opinion and the doctor told him that he was not in a position to say about the causing of death of Malati. He says that he next went to the P.S. and police came to the place of occurrence and prepared an inquest report which he signed. He further says that from the assembled people he came to learn that the dead body of the victim was recovered from the pond. P.W.3 Smt. Aloka Das is the mother of the deceased Malati. She says that after 1 year of marriage with the accused, Malati died in her matrimonial home. She says that the maternal uncle of the accused came to call them at about 6-00 a.m. and they went to the house of the accused and saw that the dead body of Malati was received from the water and kept lying on the courtyard of the house of the accused. She says that after marriage the accused had good relation with Malati. She also says that they learnt from the local men that the victim was killed at night and her dead body was thrown into the pond at night. She saw marks of red ecchymosis on the chest, throat and cheeks of Malati. Her evidence is that on the previous day only the accused and her daughter were in the house of the accused. In her cross-examination she says that her daughter (Malati) was not suffering from any ailment either before her death or at the time of death. She says that she does not know who killed Malati.