STATE OF BIHAR Vs. SARYU ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PROSECUTION case initiated on the basis of fard-bayan of Smt. Gayatri Devi, in brief, is that she was married with accused-respondent Saryu Roy, ten years ago. After one year of the marriage, her 'Gauna' was performed, she came to her matrimonial home. It can be said that for the first time, she came to her sasural. At this occasion, it is alleged that she remained to her sasural (matrimonial home) for fifteen days (15) only. Demand of dowry continued to be made as was being demanded at the occasion of marriage followed by torture and cruelty. The same was informed to informant's father who taken away the informant with him. At two occasions the informant with her father and on his death with his uncle came to her sasural, but was driven away. After death of the uncle, she again came with her maternal grand father and a villager Nakul Rai, to her sasural, but again she was driven away. She gathered information about next marriage of her husband with Geeta Devi. She came to her sasural started to reside there avoiding the protest from accused persons and the second wife Geeta Devi, but was tortured by them. She was maintaining herself on the earning of her working as labourer. Trial ended in conviction by Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamui, same was challenged in appeal vide Criminal Appeal No.169 of 2002, which is allowed after hearing both the parties acquitting the accused-respondents. Acquittal is recorded by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamui, validity of which is challenged by filing the present appeal.

(2.) IT is pertinent to mention here that case was lodged for the offence under Sections 498A, 494 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, but conviction was recorded by the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamui for the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code against accused-respondents only. One of the accused persons namely Geeta Devi was acquitted by the trial Court itself.

(3.) PW -2 Gauri Devi on this point is stating that 'Gauna' was performed after five years of the marriage. Informant lived for five years, thereafter came to her parents and told about demand and torture. Another witness PW-3 states about performance of 'Gauna', but three years ago. Gayatri Devi was assaulted by her in-laws for dowry. According to the first information report, she was residing from four months ago to filing of the first information report to her sasural. These statements are perverse to the material on record (statement of witnesses), is not the submission of learned counsel for the State. Moreover, first information report is lodged after ten years of the marriage. One of the reasons of torture is demand of dowry, continuation of the same for such a long period even after marrying another lady, certainly is not believable, which rightly has been disbelieved by the Appellate Court itself. So, it needs no interference in the same (finding) of the trial Court.