SANJIB SAHU & ORS. Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, the convicts in S.T. Case No.88/4 of 2008 of the Court of Learned. Addl. Sessions Judge, Kuchinda assail the Judgment dated 10.12.2010 convicting them for the offence under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 406/34 of the IPC. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief, is that informant-Saroj Barik gave his sister-Dolly @ Upama Barik in marriage to the accused, Sanjib Sahu. The marriage was solemnized on 18.02.2005. After two months of marriage, the accused-Sanjib along with co-accused persons, i.e. his parents and sisters inflicted physical and mental torture to his sister on demand of dowry of Rs.1.00,000. It is alleged that when such torture became unbearable on the part of Upama, she came back to her father "â„¢s house during August, 2006. It is further alleged that in the month of August, 2006, the accused-Danesh Sahu and Binodini Sahu, parents of the Sanjib went to the house of the deceased and committed before the village gentlemen that they will never ill-treat Upama in future. Relying on the assurance given by the village gentlemen, Upama went to her matrimonial house. On 20.08.2006, Upama along with her husband came to the informant "â„¢s house. They returned to their marital house on 22.08.2006. Then, the informant received information that on their way back from the house of the informant at Nuadihi to their house at village-Bandhpali, inside Gunduruchuan jungle, Upama met her death. On receipt of such information, the informant arrived at the spot, but found the dead body of Upama had already been shifted from the spot. On his query, it was ascertained that it was a case of murder committed by the accused. Therefore, he submitted a written FIR before the OIC, Kuchinda Police Station, who registered it as Kuchinda P.S. Case No.140/2006 and took up investigation. After completion of investigation, he submitted charge sheet against the accused persons under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 406/34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act.

(3.) The accused persons took the plea of complete denial of the incident. Additionally, they stated that Upama Barik @ Sahu died due to motor cycle accident. Consequent upon denial of the prosecution gravamen by the defence, the Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kuchina coined four points to be determined in this case.