SHANKAR AWADHIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole appellant has been convicted under Section 201, IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that the choukidar Chandrama Manjhi, PW 9, informant of this case reported to the SI of Jadopur Police Station at 10 O'clock in the night of 27th June, 1987 at Hirapakar overbridge. He reported to the SI that in the morning of 26th June, 1987, he heard a rumour that a dead body was lying in Mahadia Soti and he had gone to Mahadia Soti in search of the dead body but, did not find it. On the same day, he was informed by a secret man that Manti Devi (deceased) daughter of Shankar Awadhia of Hirapakar was married five years ago with Prabhu Prasad of village Kararia and the deceased mostly used to stay at her father's house. It has been stated that the deceased had illegal relation with co-accused Ragha Prasad of village Hirapakar, due to which she became pregnant. It has been stated that, one and half month before the report of the informant, the deceased Manti had gone to her in-law's house and after 15 to 20 days of her going there, her father had brought her back. It has been stated that the inmates of her sasural were aware about her pregnancy and due to that, they had sent her back to her father's house. It has been alleged that about 10 days before the report of the informant, the deceased Manti Devi was taken away in the night by the appellant Shankar Awadhia, Prabhu Prasad, Satya Narayan Prasad and Laldeo Prasad for the purpose of killing her and she did not return back to her house. When the informant enquired from the appellant, he said that his daughter Manti Devi was in her sasural. Then, the informant went to the sasural of the deceased to enquire about her but, she was not there the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded by SI Sheoji Singh of Jadopur Police Station on 27.6.1987 at 01.00 hour at Hirapakar Nahar Pul, on the basis of which the FIR of this case was drawn. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the accused. On the basis of charge-sheet, cognizance was taken and subsequently, the trial concluded with the result as stated above.

(3.) The appellant pleaded not guilty and stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case.