EJAJUL ANSARI Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Ejajul Ansari (hereinafter to be referred to as accused) along with his real brother Feyazul Ansari faced the trial for the charge of Sec. 304B and 498 A IPC. His brother Feyazul Ansari however is acquitted of the charge whereas accused has suffered conviction for the charge of Sec. 304B IPC vide impugned judgment of learned Vth Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi dated 20.12.2002 and sentenced for life, aggrieved thereof, he has preferred the instant appeal for setting aside the conviction/sentence slapped upon him. State has however chosen not to file any appeal against the acquittal earned by co -accused Feyazul Ansari.

(2.) Priority was given to the instant appeal considering the incarceration period of the accused which, according to the report of the Registry, was more than 12 years. However, as per the latest report rendered by the Jail Superintendent where the accused was lodged after conviction, is to the effect that he was released from the jail on 15.11.2011 after serving his entire sentence including the remission period. Be that as it may, the instant appeal being the statutory appeal and having been already admitted, calls for its disposal on its merits.

(3.) One Roshan Khatoon, wife of the accused, is the deceased in this case. The present case was registered on the basis of the fardbeyan (first information report) of one Islam Ansari, the uncle of the deceased, who reported that the deceased has illicit relation with the accused who is from the same village and he came to know of this fact in the month of January, 1999 only when the deceased had become pregnant. It is thereafter a Panchayati was convened and it was decided to get the deceased married to the accused and ultimately both got married. At the time of the marriage, the accused had made demand of Rs. 20,000/ -, one Rajdoot Motorcycle and one colour television but the assurance was given to him that the said demand would be fulfilled later as at the time of marriage the complainant side was not having that much of financial ability. It is then alleged that one month before the main occurrence i.e. somewhere in April, 1999, the accused had given one bottle of liquid to the deceased and told her to take it in the night but deceased did not take it as she came to know that there was some poison in the bottle. She was assaulted by the accused and when this incident came to the notice of the complainant, he inquired about the incident from the accused and Feyazul Ansari, his brother, who reiterated the aforesaid demand and stated that if the same was not fulfilled, divorce would be given to the deceased. It is then alleged that one day prior to the occurrence i.e. 02.05.1999 at about 8.00 P.M. the deceased had come to her maternal house and disclosed that the accused and Feyazul Ansari were torturing her because of dowry demand but the first informant and Rahman Ansari told the deceased to go back to her matrimonial home and that the matter would be settled tomorrow, resultantly she went back. It is at 7.00 A.M. on 03.05.1999 he saw the family members of accused in a suspicious circumstance and when he went to the house of the deceased, he saw the dead body of her niece in the courtyard and there were several marks of injury on her dead body. On inquiry the accused persons did not tell anything. This is how on the statement of PW Islam Ansari, the present case was registered against the accused and his brother Feyazul Ansari (since acquitted).