PAPPU GOSWAMI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai appeared and submitted that his client has already taken no objection from him, therefore, his name should not figure furthermore. However, due to absence of counsel for appellants, assistance of learned Amicus Curiae has already been sought for.

(2.) CR . Appeal No. 763/2011 happens to be on behalf of appellant Pappu Goswami who has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Sections 304B of the IPC by the Additional Sessions Judge -FTC -5th , Jamui vide judgment dated 20.05.2011 and sentence dated 24.05.2011 directing to undergo RI for ten years in connection with Sessions Trial No. 903/2004/74/2009 is the husband of deceased Munni Devi who met with dowry death on 27/28.05.2004 at her Sasural lying at village -Nawadih for which her mother Laxmi Devi (PW -7) had launched prosecution as a result of which Khaira P.S. Case No. 97/2004 had originated. It is evident that after completion of investigation two separate charge -sheets were submitted by the Investigating Officer at due interval, one against appellant and another relating to other family members who also faced trial by the same Court under Sessions Trial No. 82/2007/73/2009 and found convicted and sentenced in similar way for which Cr.Appeal No. 820/2011 is pending and on account thereof, both the appeals have been taken up for hearing conjointly.

(3.) THE learned APP though fairly concedes that there happens to be no specific provision permitting such kind of exercise but submitted that it was the accused/convict/appellants who had prayed for and on account thereof, no prejudice could be said to have caused to them. Apart from this, it has also been submitted that appellant, Pappu Goswami on account of being under custody since 18.06.2004 might have completed the period of sentence and in case the matter is remitted back to the learned lower court, it will cause hardship.