KISHLESHWAR UPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 26th February 2005 and order of sentence dated 28th February 2005 of the Additional Sessions Judge cum-F.T.C.III, Rohtas at Sasaram passed in Sessions Trial No. 266 of 1996/451 of 2003, whereby the Appellants have been convicted Under Section 304B and 201 IPC and respectively sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and R.I. for 2 years.

(2.) Deceased Meera Devi was sister of informant Kanhaiya Pandey (P.W.3). The prosecution commenced with the fard-beyan of informant Kanhaiya Pandey which was recorded on 27th December 1994 at 4:00 P.M. at Sirhi Police Out Post by S.I. B.P. Yadav (P.W.2), whose evidence has been subsequently recorded Under Section 391 Code of Criminal Procedure under the direction of this Court.

(3.) The informant alleged in his fard-beyan (Ext-1 & 2) that he had married his sister (deceased) aged about 18 years, about 4 years ago to Appellant Kishleshwar Upadhyay and that she had gone to her matrimonial home (Sasural) in the month of December 1993, after performance of Gauna rituals and thereafter she was living there. He described the cash money, ornaments and one buffalo as given in gift at the time of marriage, but he alleged that after the marriage, the Sasural people of the deceased started demanding one motor-cycle and a colour T.V. It was also alleged that whenever he (informant) and his family members used to go to deceased's Sasural for meeting her and bringing her to her Maika, her (deceased's) mother-in-law, father-in-law, husband and Dewar did not allow them to meet her (deceased) and that they also used to abuse them. The informant further alleged in his fard-beyan that he learnt from his co-villagers that the Sasural people of the deceased used to torture her and did not provide her proper food and also used to beat her. He also alleged that he learnt through rumor that on 17th December 1994, the Sasural people of the deceased caused the death of his sister (deceased) by way of torturing and that they also clandestinely cremated the dead body and that any information about the death and cremation was not given to deceased's Maika family. It was also alleged in his fard-beyan that after learning about the occurrence, the informant along with his family members went to deceased's Sasural and there they learnt form the co-villagers that the Appellants had tortured and killed the deceased due to non-fulfilment of the demand of dowry. The Appellants had pleaded not guilty of the charges and their defence was that the deceased had died a natural death of the ailment of tuberculosis.