MITHU @ MITHLESH ROUT Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the appellants stand convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 304(B) /34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for three years and ten years respectively, by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in Sessions Trial No. 63 of 1998/29 of 1998.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this appeal are that appellant Mithu @ Mithlesh Rout was married with Radhiya @ Radha Devi, daughter of informant Bhikhan Mahto (P.W. 1) in the year 1993.

(3.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellants on the grounds that the learned trial court has not considered the materials on record properly. It is also asserted that the conviction is based upon the sole evidence of the informant, as other witnesses have turned hostile. According to Mr. S.K. Ughal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, the statement of P.W. 1 is also contradictory and deserves to be rejected as hetried to implicate all the appellants though they were not in any way connected with the dowry demands. According to learned counsel, the story that he was confined in the house of the appellants for two days itself makes the whole prosecution story doubtful. In this context, the statement of D.W. 2 Jageshwar Prasad Yadav is cited. It is also submitted that even the inquest report prepared by the police has not been supported by P.W. 2, P.W. 5 and P.W. 6. Learned counsel further pointed out that the description of the dead body given by P.W. 1 has not been supported by P.W. 4, the investigating officer in this case. Learned counsel further pointed out that the informant has failed to connect the dowry demands with other appellants except the husband. Therefore, the conviction of the appellants be set aside and the appellants be acquitted of the charges.