KARUNAKAR ARAKHA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the three appellants having been convicted for commission of offences under Sections 302/304-B/498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal code (in short 'ipc') as well as under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life for their conviction under Section 302/34 and 304-B/34 ipc, imprisonment for three years for their conviction under Section 498-A/34 IPC and imprisonment for one year for their conviction under Section 4 of the D. P. Act by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak in S. T. No. 20/66 of 1996, have preferred this appeal against such order of conviction and sentence.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution as revealed from the F. I. R. is that deceased Kanakalata Arakha had married appellant No. 1 karunakar Arakha on 21. 5. 1993. At the time of marriage, a cash of Rs. 20,000/-, gold chain and other household articles as per demand of the appellants had been given. Four to five months after marriage, a further sum of Rs. 20,000/- was demanded, which could not be paid, as a result of which, appellants tortured, insulted and harassed the deceased in various ways for non-fulfilment of the said dowry demand. Appellant no. 2 Narayan Arakha lodged a report (Ext. A) on 15. 7. 1994 at Bhandaripokhari Police station informing therein that the deceased was missing and on search, her dead body was found in a well located within their bari (compound) and the said report was registered as U. D. Case No. 22/94. P. W. 13 held inquest on the dead body of the deceased in presence of the Executive Magistrate p. W. 16, brother of the deceased P. W. 4 and two local witnesses P. Ws. l and 10. After post mortem examination, it was found that the death was due to asphyxia by smothering and the doctor opined that. it was a case of post-mortem drowning. Upon receipt of such post-mortem report, a formal F. I. R. was received from P. W. 4 and a case was registered for commission of the aforesaid offences. In course of investigation, the wearing apparels and ornaments of the deceased apart from some letters and dowry articles claimed to have been given at the time of marriage, were seized. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted for commission of the aforesaid offences. The plea of defence is denial of the prosecution case.

(3.) IT is the case of the appellants that the brothers of the deceased were not coming to their house on festive occasions and they also did not invite the deceased to attend the marriage function of the daughter of her brother, as a result of which, the deceased felt hurt and committed suicide by jumping into the well. It was also the case of the appellant Karunakar that he was working in a biscuit factory at Jagatpur. and was absent in the house on the date of occurrence. A further plea was taken by the appellants to the effect that the brothers of the deceased demanded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to suppress the matter but such amount having not been paid by the appellants, a false case has been foisted against them.