BINAY MUKHERJEE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed this Criminal Revision against the order dated 6.10.2001, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo at Tenughat, in sessions Trial No. 43 of 2001, whereby and whereunder, the petition filed by these petitioners under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharging them, has been rejected.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is based on the written information, given by the informant Pradeep Kumar Chatterjee, alleging therein, that his daughter Pampa Mukherjee was married with Partho Mukherjee (not petitioner) on 28th February, 1997. Soon after the marriage, these petitioners and Partho Mukherjee, husband of Pumpa Mukherjee, started torturing her for dowry. The informant filed a complaint against these petitioners and Partho Mukherjee on 13.8.1998. On 22.11.2000 he received telephonic message from L.N. Studio that his daughter had sustained burn injury at about 7.00 p.m. and was taken to General Hospital, Bokaro. She had sustained 100% burn injury on her person. The informant alleged that all the accused persons, including these petitioners tried to kill Pampa Mukherjee by sprinkling Kerosene oil and setting her on fire who died in course of treatment in the Hospital on 25.11.2000 at 2.50 p.m. After investigation, charge -sheet has been submitted against these petitioner and Partho Mukherjee under Sections 304B/498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge considered the case diary and the petition, filed under Section 227, Cr PC by the accused persons and having found sufficient materials available against them to frame charges under Sections 498A and 304B/34, IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, relying upon a case, reported in AIR 1977 SC 2018, did not find any merit in the petition, filed by the accused persons under Section 227, Cr PC and rejected the same.

(3.) OPPOSITE party No. 2. Pradeep Kumar Chatterjee, informant in this case, inspite of service of notice, served upon him, did not appear. The learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State submitted that within three years of marriage, Pampa Mukherjee was burnt to death in her matrimonial house. As per the report of the doctor, who conducted the post -mortem examination, she sustained 100% burn injury, became unconscious and died on 25.11.2000 at 2.30 p.m. She was not in a position to narrate anything which is clear from bare perusal of the case diary vide paragraph No. 7.