BIJENDRA NONIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is judgment dated 17.05.1990 passed by Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Trial No. 32 of 1989 whereby and whereunder sole appellant Bijendra Nonia has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302, 201 of the IPC and directed to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code as well as imprisonment for a period of 5 years under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code with a direction to run the sentences concurrently.

(2.) PROSECUTION case in short as per fardbeyan (Exhibit-3) of Bigu Nonia (PW-2) recorded on 01-11-1988 at Madupur Harijan Tola at about 12:00 noon disclosing therein that he had married his daughter Dulariya Devi (deceased) about 15-16 years ago in her childhood with Bijendra Nonia son of Balkeshwar Nonia of Baddikhurd, P.S.-Barun. Since then his daughter was on visiting term. She had begotten two children. His son-in-law Bijendra Nonia was employed at Khudiya Koliyari. About a month ago, on previous Monday at about 12 noon Bijendra Nonia came to him at Basta Kola Koliyari and divulged that his daughter has met with an accident and is admitted at Dehri Hospital. On this information, he along with his son-in-law proceeded through bus from Dhanbad to Dehri. At about 04:00 AM when the bus reached at Aurangabad, his son-in-law disclosed that his daughter had not met with accident therefore it will be useless to go to Dehri. After saying this his son-in-law got down from the bus and went. On this he became apprehensive with regard to welfare his daughter. He also got down and proceeded towards house of his son-in-law from Aurangabad and during midst thereof, he took company of Ramnath Singh from village- Soris. After arrival at Baddi Khurd he met with his son-in-law who on query disclosed that his daughter is no more. He further disclosed that he had murdered her because of her bad character. He did not respond when he was asked about the dead body. Then he proceeded towards P.S. but met the police official in midst of way and expressed apprehension that his daughter has been killed by his son-in-law and dead body has been concealed.

(3.) THE defence case as is evident from the mode of cross- examination as well as statement as recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is of innocence as well as complete denial of the occurrence. It has further been stated that deceased had died at her Naihar on 18.08.1988. As the appellant declined to accept offer of informant to remarry the younger sister of the deceased, so there arose dispute. When there was demand on behalf of appellant to return back the ornaments, then and then only, instant case has been filed just by way of retaliation. To support the same there has been examination of D.Ws along with exhibit of the documents.