STATE OF ORISSA Vs. SK. HIMAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents Sk. Himat, Taslima Bibi, Noorjan Bibi, Sk. Das Mahammad and Sk. Roj Mahammad faced trial under section 498(A)/34 I.P.C. and section 302/34 I.P.C. in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak in Sessions Trial No.23/80 of 1996 on the charge of subjecting Tara Bibi (hereafter the deceased ) to cruelty and also committing her murder in furtherance of their common intention. The learned trial Court vide judgment and order dated 29.4.1998 acquitted all the respondents of all the charges. Hence this Government Appeal.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that the respondent no.5 Sk. Roj Mahammad married the deceased about ten years prior to the date of occurrence and they were blessed with four children, out of whom two were alive and two died. The respondent no.3 Noorjan Bibi is the mother-in-law of the deceased. Respondent no.3 had married to one Sk. Arju Hossain, who is the natural father of respondent no.5. After death of Sk. Arju Hossain, respondent no.3 married to respondent no.1 Sk. Himat. Respondent no.2 Taslima Bibi is the married sister-in-law and respondent no.4 Sk. Das Mahammad is the brother-in-law of the deceased. It is the further prosecution case that while the deceased was staying in her in-laws house, she was subjected to physical and mental torture in connection with demand of dowry and there was attempt for settlement of the dispute between the parties. On 21.9.1990 P.W.6 Sk. Rajak, brother of the deceased received information from P.W.3 Atta Khan that the respondents were assaulting the deceased. Hearing such fact, P.W.6 along with his brother Sk. Rasid (P.W.5) proceeded to the house of the respondents situated in village Bishnupur Bindha under Bhadrak (Rural) Police Station and found the entrance door of the house of the respondents half opened. Both P.W.5 and P.W.6 noticed that the deceased was crying and there was bleeding from her nose. The respondents drove out P.W.5 and P.W.6 from their house and closed the door from inside. P.W.5 and P.W.6 remained outside and heard the shout of the deceased. They called Grama Rakhi Sk. Safee who came to the house of the respondents but found the deceased lying dead and accordingly intimated it to P.W.5 and P.W.6. On 22.9.1990 on the written report of the Grama Rakhi Sk. Safee, Bhadrak (Rural) P.S. U.D. Case No.39 of 1990 was registered by P.W.8 Jayant Kumar Tripathy, who was by then attached to Bhadrak (Rural) Police station as Officer-in-Charge. It was reported by the Grama Rakhi that on 21.9.1990 at about 10.30 p.m. the deceased had committed suicide probably by consuming poison. After registering the U.D. case, P.W.8 directed A.S.I. Sri U.N. Pani to enquire into the case. Sri Pani conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased on 22.9.1990 at 5.00 p.m. on the verandah of the house of respondent no.5 vide Ext.1. He also sent the dead body for Post-mortem examination to the District Headquarters Hospital, Bhadrak. P.W.7 Dr. Satyabhama Behera who was the Assistant Surgeon attached to the said hospital conducted the Post-mortem examination on 23.9.1990 and she noticed a lacerated injury on the left lower lip, a contusion over left anterior left chest wall, contusion over epigastrium and right hypochondrium and opined all the injuries to be ante mortem in nature. She further found the liver of the deceased was lacerated on the interior surface and opined the cause of death due to shock and haemorrhage on account of rupture of liver due to external injury on the abdomen and chest. The Post-mortem report was marked as Ext.5. Sri Pani sent the viscera of the deceased to S.F.L., Rasulgarh for chemical analysis and the viscera report (Ext.9) indicates that no common insecticidal, alkaloidal and metallic poison could be detected in the viscera. Sri Pani also seized the wearing apparels of the deceased vide seizure list (Ext.2). Sri Pani made a query from the Department of F.M.T., S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack regarding final opinion as to cause of death of the deceased and perusing the copy of the inquest report, dead body challan and Post-mortem report, it was opined by the Professor and Head of the Department of F.M.T. that due to direct assault on the deceased, there was rupture of liver and the death was homicidal. The opinion of the Professor and Head of Department, F.M.T. has been marked as Ext.10.

(3.) During course of trial, the prosecution examined nine witnesses. P.W.1 Sk. Nasim was a co-villager of the respondents who saw the dead body of the deceased lying in the house of respondent no.5. P.W.2 Sk. Ramjan is a witness to the inquest vide Ext.1 and also to the seizure of the wearing apparels of the deceased vide Ext.2. P.W.3 Atta Khan stated to have seen the respondent no.5 and his other family members assaulting the deceased by fist blows and slaps and accordingly he intimated the same to P.W.6. P.W.4 Naba Kishore Rana did not support the prosecution case and he was declared hostile. P.W.5 and his cousin brother P.W.6 stated to have proceeded to the village of the respondents on receipt of information from P.W.3 and stated in detail as to what happened after their arrival in the house of the respondents. P.W.7 Dr. Satyabhama Behera conducted the Post-mortem examination and proved her report (Ext.5). P.W.8 and P.W.9 are the Investigating Officers.