RAMBAHADUR SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 11th day of May, 2001, and the order dated 16th May, 2001, passed by Mr. Shyam Badan Singh, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in Sessions Trial Nos. 332/90 and 4/91 whereby he has been pleased to convict all the four appellants under Sections 304-B, 498-A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. He has further been pleased to sentence all the appellants to undergo RI for three years under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and to pay fine of rupees two thousand each and in default of payment to undergo RI for a period of three months and for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. He has further sentenced all the appellants to undergo RI for three years. He has further ordered that all the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as per the written report submitted by Mahipat Sah in Runnisaidpur Police Station on 8.7.1990, in brief, is that Punam Devi was her daughter. She was married to Shiv Nath Prasad on 5.5.1986. At the time of marriage the informant had agreed to pay rupees twenty thousand and five tola gold in the Tilak but as his financial condition was not very good, so, he paid only rupees eleven thousand in cash by way of tilak and rupees ten thousand remained due to be paid later on. Further case is that for payment of the said amount the informant's son-in-law Shiv Nath Pd., his father Ram Bahadur Sah, his mother and the elder brother of his son-in-law were regularly putting pressure upon the informant's daughter. They started harassing and torturing the informant's daughter for realisation of the said amount. On getting information about the harassment of his daughter, the informant along with his son Bindu Sah went to the sasural of his daughter on 15.6.1990 and made inquiry from his daughter, whereupon, the informant's daughter Punam started weeping and told him that she was being assaulted by the appellant and they have given threat that if she would not bring rupees ten thousand from her naihar then she would be assaulted and would be given only one-time meal. It is further said that the informant also saw the mark of violence on the body of her daughter. Further case is that the informant tried his best to pacify his daughter and also made inquiry from his son-in-law and his brother, whereupon, both the persons gave threat that if he wanted to see his daughter alive then he should pay the remaining cash amounting to rupees ten thousand. Further case is that the informant tried his best to settle the matter and assured the in-laws of his daughter that as soon as his financial position improves he will pay the rest amount but his son-in-law did not agree and refused to take the responsibility of his daughter. Further case is that on 17.6.1990, the informant sent his son, namely, Dilip Kumar to the sasural of his daughter Punam and after his return from the sasural of his sister, he told the informant that Punam was weeping in her sasural and Shiv Nath Prasad and his mother were abusing her. Further case is that on 1.7.1990 father of the Gotani of Punam told the informant's son Bindu Sah that Punam had died. On getting this information, the informant along with his son Bindu and Dilip went to village Mauna at the sasural of Punam and on enquiry he was told that Punam died due to taking of poison.

(3.) On the basis of the above Fardbeyan of the informant, Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 24 dated 8.7.1990 under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, was instituted against the appellants and others and the investigation was handed over to Raj Bali Sah, Officer-in-charge of Runnisaidpur P.S.