TRIBHUWAN MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by Shri Arun Kumar, 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj dated 12.4.1999 in Sessions Trial No. 161/97/11/97 The accused was convicted under Section 304-B and Section 201 and Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 304-B and three years and two years under Sections 498-A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, as stated in the complaint petition, which was referred to the police for investigation, is that the complainant had married his daughter Reshmi Devi to the accused appellant in the year 1995. Immediately after the marriage, his daughter went to the house of the accused. At the time of marriage, the complainant had gifted articles worth Rs. 25,000/- to the accused; but the accused was dissatisfied and, therefore, he used to pressure and torture the deceased for bringing further articles from her parents. The deceased informed her father about this kind of pressure upon her several times. Then the complainant himself and his nephew went to the house of the accused and arranged panchaiti and persuaded the accused and his family members not to subject the deceased to any kind of torture. In July of the last year (prior to the filing of the complaint petition on 26.11.1996) the brother of the complainant Baburam Mahto went to the house of the accused and pacified the accused and his father Suresh Mahto and requested them not to torture the deceased. The complainant later learnt that accused-appellant went to Calcutta along with his wife. The complainant was under impression that the accused had gone to Calcutta in the company of his wife and hence, he did not go to the village of the accused to make any enquiry about her. However, on 20.9.1996 the complainant and his bhagina (sister's son) went to the village of the accused to inquire about the welfare of the daughter. Then other accused-persons named in the complaint petition as Birendra, Toofani, Sri Mahto and Chandrika and some others (in all about 10 persons) told him that the accused had gone to Calcutta with his wife. Thereafter, when Tribhuwan Mahto and Suresh Mahto, father of the accused-appellant case back to his village from Calcutta on the occasion of Diwali, then the complainant again went to his daughter's sasural to learn about her welfare. On this occasion, Suresh Mahto, father-in-law of the deceased, got nervous in talking with the complainant and fled away from the village the same night. The complainant grew suspicious and made enquiry from villagers who told him that the complainant's daughter was killed and the dead-body was thrown into the canal water after being kept in a bag.

(3.) The complainant returned to his village and thereafter, he went to Calcutta to enquire about his daughter from the accused-appellant and his father Suresh Mahto, but these two persons failed to give any satisfactory reply to his anxious enquiry. The complainant returned from Calcutta and went to P.S. Uchkagaon, but the police refused to entertain any case and thereafter the complainant presented his complaint petition before the Court on 26.11.1996. This complainant was referred to the police for investigation. Then subsequent investigation, submission of charge-sheet, etc. and trial of the accused followed.