KAVITA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of conviction dated 23.5.2014, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sheohar, whereby the appellants who are in-laws of the deceased were held guilty under section 304B/34 IPC and sentenced them to suffer RI for life vide order dated 28.5.2014.

(2.) Appellant Kavita Devi (accused no.1) is Gotini (sister- in-law) , appellant Awadhesh Sah (accused no.2) is Dewar (brotherin-law) , appellant Ram Autar Sah (accused no.3) and Sanjha Devi (accused no.4) are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased respectively. Appellant Ram Pravesh Sah (accused no.5) is the husband of the deceased.

(3.) Prosecution case, as disclosed in the fard beyan (Exhibit 8) made by PW 6 (Ram Chandra Sah) , father of the deceased and recorded by PW 7 (Somal Kant Jha) SI of police at the place of occurrence on 29.8.2011 at 8 AM is that the marriage of Seema Devi was solemnized with accused no.5 Ram Pravesh Sah on 1.5.2009. The informant had gifted ornaments etc. at the time of marriage. When the victim went to her Sasural for the first time the appellants started torturing her as the demand of motorcycle was not fulfilled by the informant. The daughter used to communicate such torture to her father and mother. The further allegation is that the informant called his son-in-law (accused no.5) and Samdhi (accused no.3) to his house in presence of witnesses and gave Rs.45, 000/- for purchase of motorcycle. The daughter had come to Naihar. Four months prior to the incident, accused no.5 took her back to the Sasural. Again a demand was made for giving She-buffalo and a cash of Rs. 1 lac in the name of starting business by the husband. As the said demand was not met by the parents, the victim was being tortured/harassed. It has also been alleged that owing to the illicit relationship between the husband of the victim (accused no.5) and appellant Kavita Devi (accused no.1) which was being protested by the victim, she was also being physically assaulted by accused nos.1, 4 and 5. Merely a week before the incident, the informant along with PWs. 2, 3 and 4 had gone to Sasural of the victim for a panchayati in which the informant had forbade them from assaulting/torturing his daughter and also requested to permit her to come to Naihar which was refused on the plea that Bidagri would be done after few months. Subsequently, the informant got the information about the death of his daughter at Sasural. Such information was given to him on telephone by accused no.5, wherein it was disclosed that Seema Devi was seriously ill. The prosecution case is that in the night itself, the informant along with the witnesses proceeded to the Sasural of the victim and reached in the morning only to find Seema Devi lying dead on a mat in one of the outer rooms of the house of the appellants. Blood stain marks were seen on her face, nose and legs. On query, the appellants gave an explanation that while scaling from the stairs she had fallen down and received injuries which resulted in her death. The informant immediately informed the police. The I.O. reached the place of occurrence before 8 AM in the morning and recorded the fard beyan (Exhibit 8) of PW 6 which was witnessed by PW 2 (Ash Naryan Sah) . Being the officer-in-charge of the police station, he took up the investigation and conducted the death inquest proceeding (Exhibit 7) witnessed by PWs 2 and 4 who had accompanied the informant to the Sasural of the victim. Lathi having blood stain was found near the dead body. The IO seized the Lathi under a seizure memo which again was witnessed by PWs 2 and The signatures on the seizure memo have been proved as Exhibits 3 and 3/1 respectively. Re-statement of the informant was recorded at the site of the occurrence. The dead body was dispatched for post mortem examination. On receiving the post mortem report and after completing the investigation he laid the charge sheet which gave rise to the present trial on the file of the learned trial court.