AMBIKA RAJAK Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRITTEN report of Chhunu Rajak has been made basis for the F.I.R. which, in brief, is that his sister Rebi Devi was married with accused-appellant Ambika Rajak. Marriage solemnized in a temple at Agamkuan. There was no demand of dowry at the occasion of marriage. It is further said that informant sister's husband made a demand of Rs. 10,000.00 after coming to informant's house. Demand was constant from his sister by accused-appellant Ambika Rajak. His sister also told him when he went to meet her at Saristabad that demand was constantly made by accused-appellant Ambika Rajak. It has further been stated that when the informant went to his sister, he came to know that his sister had died and neighbours told/informed about killing of informant's sister by accused-appellant Ambika Rajak, his mother, elder brother Birmani Rajak and younger brother Naresh Rajak on 11.06.1994.

(2.) TRIAL is ended in conviction and sentence to accused-appellants under Sections 304B, 498A and 201 of the I.P.C. by passing the impugned judgment and order, validity of which has been questioned through filing of these appeals.

(3.) FOR the killing, there is suspicion basing statement of neighbours who never appeared to corroborate the same clearly indicating about absence of any eye witness. Further, submission of learned counsel is that deceased earlier was married elsewhere and without divorce she married accused-appellant Ambika Rajak, para-10 of P.W.1 is referred on this point which is to the effect that earlier to marriage of his sister with this accused- appellant Ambika Rajak, his sister was married in Paliganj and further states in same paragraph that his sister was left by her first husband, so there was no occasion to take divorce. Wife or husband if leaves any of them then that can be defined as desertion, a good ground for divorce but never divorce. This much is only addition to the grounds for constituting no offence under Sections 304B or 498A of the I.P.C. Once commitment of offence under Section 304B or 498A of the I.P.C. is not established then no question arises about causing disappearance of evidence of the said offence, as there can be no screening of the offender from legal punishment.