JAI SHANKAR JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.1.94 and 18.1.94, respectively, passed by the Sessions Judge, Darbhanga, in Sessions Trial No. 109/91 convicting and sentencing the appellants to undergo imprisonment for life under Sections 302/34, 304B/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, IPC). Appellants have further been convicted under Section 328, IPC but no separate sentence has been passed under this head.

(2.) The case of prosecution, in short, is that Sudha Devi, daughter of informant Hit Narayan Mishra (PW 3) was married to appellant Jai Shankar Jha about four years before the occurrence and three years after the marriage and about 11 months prior to occurrence after 'Bidai' ceremony, Sudha Devi went to her 'Sasural' and was living there but both the appellants along with co-accused Shri Narain Jha (since dead) who was father-in-law of Sudha Devi started torturing and assaulting her for the reason that she had not brought a television set in dowry. They used to give threatening to Sudha Devi that she must bring a T.V. from her parents otherwise she would not be allowed to live. Once on the occasion of 'Dashhara' before the occurrence Surendra Kumar Mishra (PW 4), brother of Sudha Devi had gone to her sasural and in his presence also both the appellants and co-accused Shri Narain Jha assaulted Sudha Devi with kicks, fists and sticks on the demand of T.V. set. The informant out of fear of his prestige did not make any complaint against the appellants to the police. The further case of the prosecution is that on 6.10.90 at about 11 a.m., both the appellants and co-accused Shri Narain Jha after assaulting Sudha Devi with kicks, fists and slaps administered poison to her and killed her. At the time of occurrence, co-accused Arjun Rai (not appellant ) who is 'bahnoi' (brother-in-law) of appellant Jai Shankar Jha was in the sasural of Sudha Devi and he also had his hand in the murder of Sudha Devi. The informant after hearing the news of murder of his daughter went to the village of her sasural where his fardheyan (Ext. 4) was recorded by ASI, Shiv Nandan Chaudhary. On the basis of fardbeyan of informant, formal FIR (Ext. 5) under Sections 302, 328, 120B/34 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibitation Act was drawn. The police visited the place of occurrence, inquest report on the dead body of Sudha Devi (Ext. 14) was prepared and her dead body was sent for post-mortem examination and viscera of the dead body was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna, for chemical examination and after receipt of report and after completing investigation charge-sheet under Sections 302, 328, 120B, IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibitation Act was submitted against both the appellants and co-accused Shri Narayan Jha and Arjun Rai. After taking cognizance case was committed to the Court of Sessions where charges under Sections 302/34, 304B/34, 120B and 328, IPC were framed against both the appellants and co-accused Shri Narayan Jha and Arjun Rai. The case of appellants as it appears from the trend of cross-examination of prosecution witnesses before the Court below was that Sudha Devi was not happy with her unbalanced marriage with appellant Jai Shankar Jha because she was elder in age than Jai Shankar Jha and for this reason she committed suicide. The Court below after trial found the appellants as well co-accused Shri Narayan Jha and Arjun Rai guilty under Sections 302/34, 304B/34, 120B and 328, IPC and accordingly, convicted and sentenced them as indicated above. It appears that during the pendency of appeal appellant Shri Narayan Jha died because considering this fact appellant Jai Shankar Jha was granted provisional bail by this Court on 24.7.1995 to participate in the funeral rite of his father.

(3.) Altogether 12 witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution. Hit Narayan Mishra (PW 3) is the informant. Sheo Shankar Mishra (PW 1) is the 'Mama' (maternal uncle) of deceased Sudha Devi. Rajiv Kumar Mishra (PW 2) is the son of PW 1. Surendra Kumar Mishra (PW 4) is the brother of deceased. Ram Dulari Devi (PW 5) is neighbour of appellants and has been declared hostile. Ramji Singh (PW 6) is the Police Officer who had conducted part investigation of this case. Kali Kant Thakur (PW 7) is the Mukhiya of the Panchayat consisting the village of appellants where the informant had sent complaint against the appellants. Sewanand Singh (PW 8), Md. Ayub (PW 10) and Bijayendra Pd. Singh (PW 12) are formal witnesses who have proved sanction order granted by the District Magistrate (Ext. 6). Viscera report (Ext. 7/1) with signature of Deputy Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna, (Ext. 7/2) and work-sheet (Ext. 9) with signature of Senior Scientific Officer (Ext. 9/1) and inquest report (Ext. 14). Atul Kumar Mallik (PW 9) is the doctor who had held post-mortem examination on the dead body of Sudha Devi. Md. Zafrul Hassan (PW 11) is a witness who at the time of post-mortem examination was present and in his presence viscera of the dead body was kept in a glass jar and he had packed the glass jar under the orders of doctor who held autopsy and had received letter from I.O. for sending the viscera to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination and he has proved the endorsement (Ext. 10) of the doctor on this letter.