LALIT MAHLI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant named above against the judgment dated 14.9.1994 passed in S.T. No. 108/92, T.R. No. 28/93 by Smt. Vidyut Prabha Singh, Vth Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under section 302/34 I.P.C. and 498A I.P.C. and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under section 302/34 I.P.C. and to undergo R.I. for two years for the offence under section 498A I.P.C. How- ever, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the F.I.R. (Ext. 3) of P.W. 4, Karu Mahli, the informant and father of Sugia Devi, the deceased of this case, recorded by O/C Laxman Ram of Chanho P.S. on 4.6.1991 at 6.30 hours regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 3.6.1991 in the house of the appellant in Village Oapa, P.S. Chanho, District Ranchi.

(3.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that P.W. 3, Dukhia Mahli, the elder son-in-law of the informant (P.W. 4) came to his house in village Salgi, P.S. Kuru and informed him that his daughter Sugia Devi has been done to death and on that information he (P.W. 4) along with his wife (P.W.1), his son (P.W. 2) in the company of Dukhia Mahli (P.W. 3) came to Village Oapa and saw the dead body of the deceased and found an injury on her right side chest said to have been caused by dagger. It is alleged that the marriage of Sugia Devi had been solemnized 5 or 6 years prior to the occurrence with the appellant and she had a daughter aged about 4 years born to her. The prosecution case further is that Sugia Devi had returned to her matrimonial home eight days prior to the occurrence in the company of Charka Mahli, the father of the appellant, though she was unwilling to come to her matrimonial home in view of the fact that she was not provided with food there and she was also vexed, harassed and assaulted there. It is also alleged that the appellant along with the deceased had gone to work at Patna in some brick kiln, a year prior to the occurrence but the mother of the appellant went there and brought the appellant back to her house leaving Sugia Devi there and four and five days thereafter Sugia Devi returned to her parents' house and she has told that she will not go her matrimonial home at Oapa. Lastly it has beeen alleged that the appellant along with his brothers, i.e. the absconded accused Birua Mahli and Punit Mahli, in furtherance of their common intention had committed the murder of Sugia Devi by dagger.