DEEPAK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sole appellant in this case has been convicted under Section 302/498A/201 of the Indian Penal Code by the judgment and order dated 22.12.1992 in S.T. No. 3 of 1992 by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur and he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and he has also been sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. But both the sentences under Secs. 201 and 498-A of the I.P.C. have been ordered to run concurrently, but in respect of sentence under Section 302 I.P.C., it was ordered to be consecutive considering the brutality of the offence.

(2.) The accused-appellant at the time of occurrence was a Lecturer in Chemistry in K.M.P.M. College Bistupur, Jamshedpur. Accused had married Pushpa, who is alleged to be dead several years ago and she happened to be daughter of a rich person, Baleshwar Prasad Trivedi (P.W. 15) of Muzaffarpur. After the marriage, for some time, both the husband and wife were living at Muzaffarpur and then after getting the service of Lecturership, they shifted to Jamshedpur. It should be mentioned here that both the accused and his wife Pushpa were the students of post-graduate class in Chemistry while marriage was solemnised between the two. Three kids were born out of the wedlock, two female and one male. At the time of the occurrence, the eldest daughter was studying at Mussorie living in residential Boarding house. The youngest male child was with them. Admittedly, at the time of occurrence, but the accused and his wife were living together in a quarter at Quarter No. 1/L AIV type, old Baradwari near the Ramleela ground at Sakchi within Jamshedpur. It is the case of the prosecution that since after the marriage, the relationship between the wife and the husband were not very cordial as the accused husband was always demanding money and other considerations from the rich father-in-law either directly or through his wife Pushpa. It is the case of the prosecution that on 6.6.1991, the Informant Baleshwar Prasad Trivedi received a telephonic message from the accused Deepak Kumar that his wife was missing since last Sunday. Telephonic message was given by the accused-appellant from Jamshedpur and was received at Muzaffarpur but when the informant and his son wanted to have more details, the telephone connection was disconnected by the accused-appellant. On receipt of this information, as a poor father the informant became very much suspicious and sent immediately his son, Bipin Trivedi (P.W. 11) alongwith his brother-in-law, Bishwanath Choudhary (P.W. 12), Anil Kumar and Arbind Kumar to Jamshedpur to ascertain the whereabouts of his daughter Pushpa. On 7.6.1991 Bipin Trivedi informed his father over telephone from Jamshedpur that neither Pushpa nor the accused Deepak Kumar were available at the quarter in which they were living at Jamshedpur rather the quarter was under lock and key. Definitely, this brought apprehension in the mind of the informant that his daughter might have been concealed by the accused, Deepak Kumar as their relationship was strained since long before. The informant then went to Muzaffarpur Police Station and lodged an F.I.R. stating that he smells foul play by the accused-appellant as Deepak Kumar was always squeezing money from the informant on one plea or the other and for non-payment, his daughter Pushpa was being tortured by the appellant.

(3.) The Fardbeyan (Ext.8) made by the informant was sent to Sakchi Police Station at Jamshedpur as the occurrence took place within the jurisdiction of Sakchi Police Station. First of all, a case was registered under Section 364/498A of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and started investigation. In course of the investigation, Deepak Kumar was arrested by the police at his quarter and it is the case of the prosecution that the accused-appellant, Deepak Kumar had made clear confession about killing of his wife within the quarter and then cut the dead body into pieces and got it dumped in a trunk and a suitcase and those were taken to Patna and from Mahatma Gandhi Setu Bridge, the trunk and the suitcase were thrown out in the river Ganges with the help of the driver of the Taxi, on the plea that the same contained articles of Puja. Subsequently, the case was registered under Section 498A/302/201 of the I.P.C. vide order dated 27.8.1991. From the neighbouring people of the quarter No. 1/L-IV, PWs 11 and 12 came to know that in the quarter accused Deepak Kumar, his brother, Ajay Sharma and his father were seen last on the previous Sunday so there was apprehension that the deceased Pushpa was concealed or made missing by those persons and as such alongwith Deepak Kumar, his father and brother were also made co-accused.