KALAWATI DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The four appellants in this batch of three appeals have been found guilty for offences under Section 304B, IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years, one year and two years respectively for the aforesaid offences by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Patna in Sessions Trial No. 295 of 1989. The appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 2000 are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the victim girl. The appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 186 of 2000 is the son-in-law of victim girl and the appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 157 of 2000 is the brother-in-law (Devar) of the victim. The First Information Report was instituted by the father of the victim Ram Uchit Prasad on 27.1.1988.

(2.) The prosecution case as per the First Information Report is that Sudha Rani, the daughter of the informant was married to Kumar Dhirendra Nath in May, 1984. Sudha Rani left her matrimonial home in May, 1987. It is said that she had complained that her husband and his parents had demanded a watch and a T.V. and due to non-fulfillment of demand she was tortured. According to the informant his son-in-law had made demand even prior to the 'Ruksati' of his daughter by writing a letter to the younger sister expressing his demands. On 18.1.1988 the informant had gone to Fatuha for some work where he learnt that his daughter was admitted in hospital at Patna due to burn injuries. She died in hospital on the same day and he participated in her last rites. On 19.1.1988 he went to attend the function performed after the death of a person, in the village of his Samadhi, where he learnt that from some villagers that his daughter had been burnt by her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law (Nanand) by pouring kerosene oil over the body. She had run out of the house to seek help during the time she was set on fire and had told the villagers that she had been burnt by the aforesaid persons. After learning of the aforesaid facts the present case has been filed. Certain facts may be highlighted from the reading of the First Information Report. Firstly that the informant was present in the hospital when his daughter died, he participated in the last rites, signed on the inquest report and attended the function held just after the death of his daughter on 19.1.1988. Till 19.1.1988 he did not suspect that his daughter could have been burnt to death. Although, according to his own case in the First Information Report his daughter had disclosed to her parents that she was tortured at her in-law's house, yet he does not suspect any foul play. It may also be noted that the informant does not disclose the name of the villagers who supposedly disclosed the story of burning by the in-laws. The informant has not even tried to explain the delay in lodging of the First Information Report, considering that he was informed on 19.1.1988 regarding the suspicious circumstances in which his daughter had received burn injuries. The allegations made in the First Information Report shall now be tested by examining the evidence that has come during the trial.

(3.) There are fourteen witnesses examined in this case. Out of the fourteen witnesses PW 5, PW 6, PW 7, PW 8, PW 9, PW 11 and PW 12 have turned hostile.