SANTOSH MANDAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arising out of the judgment and order dated 2-6-1992 passed the then 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad, in Sessions Trial No. 89 of 1990 convicting the appellants under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sect ion 498A of he Indian Penal Code and then under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (the Act) and they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code: for three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code for six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 3 of the Act and for six years rigorous imprisonment under Section 4 of the Act read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The case arose out of the unnatural death of Manju Mandalani of which the Fardbeyan was submitted by her brother Dharnidhar Mandal (P .W, 3) on 22-5-1989 at about 8.30 P.M. The Fardbeyan was recorded at the house of the accused persons where Maju Mandlani was found lying dead at village Behra. The admitted position remains that Manju Mandalani was married with the accused appellant No.1, Santosh Mandal about a year prior to the date of occurrence. According to the, prosecution side, at the time of marriage as per capacity of the parents of the deceased Manju Mandalani, dowry was given to appellant No.1 but still after the marriage he continued demanding costly articles such as Tape-recorded costly watch, motorcycle etc. Tape recorder was purchased and given to the accused appellant No.1 but his demand remained for the motorcycle. Assurances were given from the side of the prosecution that as soon as money could be arranged, they would purchase the motorcycle for Santosh Mandal also but on such demands, Manju Mandalani was tortured at the house of her in-laws by all the accused persons, Manju Mandalani when visited her fathers house after three months of her marriage she reported that she was being taunted by abusing filthy remarks to the extent that she was coming from the beggers house as she could not bring proper dowry, About one month prior to the occurrence. Manju Mandalani was brought to her parentsT house by the accused- appellant No, 1 and at that time also he demanded motorcycle. It was the case of the prosecution that always accused - appellant No.1 was demanding something from the parents and the brothers of the deceased Manju Mandalani. About 20 days prior to the occurrence, P.W. 3, the informant, went to village Behra and during conversation Manju Mandalani told him that all the accused persons were beating her at the interval of two to three days. She also disclosed that Sakhi Mandalani was torturing her more and was instigating Santosh Mandal to assault her as Sakhi Mandalani was having illicit relationship with her husband Santosh Mandal and on one occasion, unfortunately Manju Mandalani had to find them in compromising position. Sakhi Mandlani threatened Manju Mandalani not to disclose the matter to others but perhaps she had disclosed the same and then she was mercilessly beaten and due to such assault, she became unconscious and she was treated by one Mantu Mandal. On receipt of such information, P.W., 3 about ten days prior to the occurrence went to the house of the accused persons along with his father P.W. 1 and they requested to take Manju with them but then accused appellant Santosh Mandal promised and assured that he would not do such thing in future. Then on such assurance, the father of Manju Mandalani returned with a request that Manju and Santosh should visit his house at Koriatand, but Santosh replied that he was going after some days as he was to shift his shop house from the present position.

(3.) On 18-5-1989 P.W. 2 Amar Nath Mandal, another: brother of Manju Mandalani went to village Behra to take Manju to his house but the accused Sakhi Mandalani told him that until and. unless watch and motorcycle were not being given, they would not allow Manju Mandalani to go of her parentTs house. It was further stated that she also threatened that if the demands were not fulfilled then Manju Mandalani would be killed. P.W. 2 returned home but they came to know from the Mausi Sas of P.W. 3 who was residing a village Behra and other persons of that village that Manju Mandalani was being tortured severely due to non - fulfillment of dowry. On the date of occurrence i.e., on 22-5-1989, one Kartik Mandal went to village Koriatand and informed that Manju Mandalani had been killed by her in-laws and the dead body was in the house. On receipt of such information, the informant (P.W. 3) along with his father and others reached village Behra at the house of the accused persons at about 6 P.M. and found that the dead body of the Manju Mandalani was lying at the Sot. Except accused Santosh Mandal, none was present in the house as the others had already fled away. Santosh Mandal begged pardon from the father of Manju Mandalani that he had committed mistake but subsequently Santosh Mandal also fled away. While, begging pardon, he touched the feet of the father of Manju Mandalani. The informant and others present there, saw the dead body and. found the mark of ligature around the dead body of the deceased. They could know that Manju was strangulated to death on account of non-fulfillment of dowry on the common intention of all the accused persons.