LAWS(PAT)-2002-7-143

RAM PRIT YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On July 04, 2002
RAM PRIT YADAV Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.1.1997 and 29.1.1997 respectively passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah, in Sessions Trial No. 317/96 convicting and sentencing the appellants to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) and to undergo R.I. for three years under Section 201, IPC. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of prosecution as stated in the fardbeyan of informant Mangal Yadav (PW 2) is that his sister Parbati Devi was married to appellant Ram Prit Yadav 5 1/ 2 years ago and her 'Gauna' had taken place about 2 1/2 years ago and thereafter, all the appellants started making demand of a buffalo as dowry and on non-fulfillment of their demand they started assaulting Parbati Devi and stopped providing her food. Parbati Devi always used to complain to informant about the torture at the hands of appellants. THEreafter once informant came to know that because of non-fulfillment of demand of appellants for buffalo they had assaulted his sister and had broken her hand and she was not in a position to walk. On this information the informant sent his brother Shambhu Yadav (PW 4) on 13.2.1996 to the house of appellants for. bringing his sister. Parbati Devi told Shambhu Yadav about the assault orj her by the appellants and also about the torture on her and Shambhu Yadav wanted to bring her with him but appellants Munishi Yadav and Shivanti Devi, in laws of Parbati Devi, did not allow her to go with him saying that after 3-4 days she would be sent to his house. On 15.2.1996 appellant Munshi Yadav come to the house of informant and informed that Parbati Devi had become traceless. THE informant along with Moti Lal Choudhary (PW 1) and Raghunath Yadav (not examined) went to the village of appellants where he did not find Parbati Devi in the house of appellants and he further found that although clothes and other articles of Parbati Devi were kept in her room but that room was freshly coated with a layer of soil and he did not find her bed in the room. THE informant made hectic search of his sister but he did not get any clue. He also came to know from the neighbours of appellants that appellants used to assault his sister on account of their demand for buffalo as dowry. In his written report the informant levelled allegation against the appellants that they had committed the murder of his sister and got her dead-body disappeared in order to escape the legal punishment for offence of murder.

(3.) IN this case we find that there is no material on record to show that Parbati Devi, sister of informant, is dead. IN absence of death of Parbati Devi this case cannot be treated as a case under Section 304-B/201, IPC for which the appellants have been found guilty and convicted and sentenced as indicated above. IN para 8 of his evidence the informant has clearly stated that he has not come to know till date whether his sister is dead or alive. Similarly. Shambhu Yadav (PW4) has stated that Parbati Devi is traceless since 5-6 months.