SUMANT OJHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL Appeal No. 33 of 1998 has been filed by the husband of the victim lady. The appellant has been convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code along with the appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 1998 paramhans Ojha, Sumant Ojha and Ajanta devi. Paramhans Ojha and Sumant Ojha are further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the appeals have been disposed of by a common judgment and order of conviction passed on 16th January, 1998 and 21st january, 1998 respectively in Sessions Trial no. 158 of 1995.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that shashi Shankar Tiwary, P. W. 12 who is the brother of the deceased lady, Sandhya Devi instituted First Information Report on 24-9-1994 alleging therein that his sister sandhya Devi was married to Tuntun Ojha on 13-7-1994 and was living in her matrimonial house. The informant, claims that he used to visit his sister regularly. On 21-9-1994, when he went to visit his sister, he was told by her that the appellants were torturing her and were making a demand of a motorcycle or Rs. 30,000/- in lieu of dowry. It is further alleged that the father-in-law paramhans Ojha refused to allow Sandhya devi to go to her village. The informant claims that he heard rumours on 24-9-1994 at about 7 a. m. that his sister had been killed in the previous night and her dead body was being cremated at the ghat. The informant names several persons, 11 in numbers, who were supposedly present at the ghat.

(3.) TO support the allegation contained in the First Information Report, 12 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. It may be mentioned here that the First Information Report was lodged in the presence of kameshwar Nath Tiwary, P. W. 11 who is the father of the deceased Sandhya Devi and p. W. 10 Shiv Kumar Singh. P. Ws. 1 and 2 have been declared as hostile. P. Ws. 3 and 5 have deposed that they were the persons who gave information regarding the death of the deceased to the informant. P. W. 4 is the witness who has made no contribution in establishing the prosecution case. P. W. 6 claims that he saw the cremation taking place but has not made any statement with respect to the circumstances under which the cremation had taken place. P. Ws. 7 and 9 have been tendered. P. W. 8 has been declared hostile witness. P. W. 10 was the person who accompany the brother of the deceased to Husaipur, the matrimonial village of Sandhya Devi, the deceased. P. Ws. 11 and 12 however are the important witnesses in these cases. The Investigating Officer of this case could not be examined, and therefore, the entire case diary has been exhibited and marked as Exhibit-5 which was objected by the Public Prosecutor conducting the trial before the Trial Court.