HIRAMAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal was preferred by three appellants, namely, Hiraman Yadav and his two sons Shree Yadav and Mukesh Yadav @ Mungeshwar Yadav. The appeal of Hiraman Yadav abated as may appear from order dated 08.11.2007 on account of his death.

(2.) THE appellants had been put on trial by the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya in Sessions Trial No.442 of 1999/581 of 1995, after being charged together under Sections 304B, 498A and 401 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They were held guilty of committing those offences and were, accordingly, directly to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years for committing the offence under Section 304B IPC and five years under Section 201/34 IPC. No sentence was passed under Section 498 of the IPC. As regards the charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act the appellants were acquitted, by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentences passed on the 25th of April, 2003.

(3.) THE prosecution case was supported by P.W.3, the uncle of the deceased, P.W.4 her cousin and P.W.11 yet another uncle of the deceased and informant of the case. They have all stated that at the time of Rukhashati some tip off between the parties on demand and none giving of certain articles had taken place, but on perusal of the evidence of the three witnesses what appears is that there is no mention as to what articles were demanded by the accused persons. It has further been stated by them that the Rukhashati was performed very cordially and there was no complain subsequent thereto as well. However, the learned trial court has gone onto rely upon the document, Ext-2, a letter, which was produced during his evidence by P.W.11 the informant of the case by claiming that it was in the hand of appellant Mukesh Yasdav @ Mungeshwar Yadav, which particular letter had been received by him. That letter is available on the record. P.W.11 was cross-examined on that aspect as may appear from evidence of P.W.11 in paragraph-14 of his evidence. The witness has stated that he had received the letter Ext-2 two years after the marriage and had kept it secured, but he has also admitted that there was no date mentioned over the letter and the letter was being produced by him for the first time in court. P.W.11 was further admitting that he did not have any other writing of Mukesh Yadav @ Mungeshwar Yadav. However, he stated that the letter was written in his presence. It was suggested to P.W.11 that Ext-2 was not in the hand of Mukesh Yadav @ Mungeshwar Yadav and that it had been forged and fabricated by P.W.11 during the pendency of the case for lending support to the charges.