SAMIR KUMAR SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Satyendra Kumar Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel representing the informant.

(2.) This appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment dtd. 1/12/2017 and the order dtd. 12/12/2017 whereby and whereunder the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-IV-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Patna has convicted the appellant for an offence punishable under Sec. 304B of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life, in Sessions Trial No. 371 of 2016 (CIS No. 459 of 2016, arising out of Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 734 of 2015). Prosecution case

(3.) The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of one Haresh Kumar Srivastava (PW-4) who is the father of the victim. In his fardbeyan recorded by the Sub-Inspector (SI) of Police K.K. Singh of Agamkuan Police Station on 27/10/2015 at 8:00 am, the informant has alleged that his daughter Namrata had been burnt by her husband Samir Kumar Sinha in Flat No. 406 of Ganga Complex within Kankarbagh Police Station by pouring kerosene oil on her body and setting her at fire by matches. Her daughter had been injured, she was brought to the hospital by the neighbours for treatment and he was informed by them. His daughter died in course of treatment on 27/10/2015. The fardbeyan was recorded by the informant in the Apollo Burn Hospital, Kumhrar, Kankarbagh, Patna. The informant further alleged that the reason for the said occurrence is that one and half year ago, her daughter was married with the appellant in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs and in the said marriage, he had spent about Rs. Ten Lakhs but after marriage, a demand of Rs. Two Lakhs and a motorcycle was being made which could not be met by his daughter. The informant claimed that his daughter was repeatedly telling him about this and yesterday on 26/10/2015 at about 4:00 pm (evening), his daughter had called for the money and said that if money would not be made available then she would be killed. The informant claimed that he told his daughter that he would come on 27/10/2015 and will convince him. According to the informant, the occurrence took place because the money and the articles could not be made available.