BALDEO SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 5.10.2002/7.10.2002 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge I, Katihar in Sessions Case No. 85 of 1998/261 of 2001, whereby both the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 201 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment for the former charge but no separate sentence has been awarded under Section 201 I.P.C.

(2.) THE prosecution case is based on the Fardbeyan of Ganga Prasad Sah (P.W.3) brother of deceased Makuna Devi recorded by Sub -Inspector of Police Mahadeo Mistri (P.W.14) on 4.9.1997 at village Ekauna Nayatola at 15.30 hrs. In short the prosecution case is that deceased Makuna Devi, aged about 18 years, was married about seven months earlier to appellant No. 1, Baldeo Sah a resident of village Ekanuna Nayatola, P.S. Mansahi, District - Katihar. After marriage for about four months the deceased and appellant No. 1 stayed in the house of the informant where he noticed frequent quarrel between them and at time also assault. About four months earlier appellant No. 1 took the deceased to Katihar for treatment and from there he took her to his village Ekauna Nayatola and they started living there. On 02.09.1997 (Tuesday) at 9 am appellant No. 1 came to village Soti, the village where the informant was married and informed him that since 8 A.M. of the previous date the deceased had run away to some place. The informant requested appellant No. 1 to come with him to search the deceased but he declined on the ground that he was tired and will stay at village Soti. The informant met his mother Sukhri Mosmat (P.W.2) and inspite of information given by her that Makuna Devi had not come to village Morsada, the informant went to his village Morsada but did not find his sister there. He came back to village Soti and there he learnt that appellant No. 1, his brother -in -law has fled away. On 3rd September, 1997 he went to village Ekauna Nayatola, the place where the deceased was married. He searched for his brother -in -law and came to know that he had gone to village Fulhara, that is the house of appellant No. 2, who is first wife of appellant No. 1. The informant went to village Fulhara and made enquiries from appellant No. 1 as to why he ran away from village Soti. On this appellant No. 1 and appellant No. 2 began to assault him. The informant ran away and came to village Ekauna. On enquiry from villagers he learnt that in the night of 01.09.1997 (Monday) both the appellants had assaulted the deceased severely and since then her sister was not seen by any one. In course of search he came to know that a dead body kept in a gunny bag had been located in river Gaheli. On going there he saw the dead body and identified the same as that of his sister Makuni Devi, the deceased. The sari and blouse on the dead body was same which he had gifted to his sister at the time of marriage. The informant claimed that the appellants and the mother of the appellant No. 1 Most. Janki Devi had conspired and killed his sister and had concealed the dead body by throwing it in river Gaheli.

(3.) THE defence appears to be a simple denial of the allegation. Although in the Fardbeyan it has come that appellant No. 1 had taken the stand that the deceased had run way in the morning of 01.09.1997 at 8 am, no such claim has been made by appellant No. 1 in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. nor any defence witness has been examined to show that there was any such information given to the villagers after the deceased allegedly fled away from the house of appellant No. 1.