NAND KISHORE SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the Criminal Appeals have been preferred against a common judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both, dated 21.08.2003, passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum in Sessions Trial No. 340 of 1999 arising out of Bagbera P.S. Case No. 199/98 corresponding to GR. Case No. 1851/98, whereby the appellants have been held guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 304 B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 34 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Since one of the appellant Gupteshwar Singh has died during pendency of the appeal on 25.04.2016, his appeal has been abated as no application for leave has been filed by relative or legal heirs within 30 days of the death of appellant as envisaged under Sec. 394 Crimial P.C., 1973 The learned Trial Court has awarded a sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for the conviction under Sec. 304 B/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also rigorous imprisonment for six months along with a fine of Rs. 1000.00 for the offence punishable under section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They are further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months along with a fine of Rs. 1000.00 for the conviction under section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, all the sentences are directed to run concurrently. In case of default of payment of fine, the appellants are directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month for each offence and the period already undergone in custody by the accused is hereby set off against the period of imprisonment.

(2.) The prosecution case is based upon the fardbeyan of Anjali Singh, recorded by the police officer on 25.09.1998 at 9.30 a.m. in the Burn ward of Tata Main Hospital (T.M.H), where the informant, in presence of her doctor, Dr. Bharat (P.W. 5), has stated that her marriage was solemnized with Nand Kishore Singh in the month of April, 1996 and from the said wedlock she has been blessed with a girl child aged about three months. The victim has further stated that, while she was residing at her sasural with her husband, her mother-in-law, father-in-law are also living with them. It is alleged that before birth of girl child, her mother-in-law and brother-in-law (Raj Kumar, appellant in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1276 of 2003) and father-in-law, all used to taunt, torture and made demand of dowry. They were torturing the victim. The victim has further stated that her father has paid Rs. One lakh in cash and price of a scooter and after taking such amount, the accused persons were torturing her for extra dowry. The victim has further stated that after birth of a girl child, her husband was also not happy with her and on trivial issues, he used to quarrel with her and abuse her. On 23.09.1998 at 6.30 am, while the victim was sleeping, her husband started waking her up, he slapped her and also pressed her neck. Somehow informant came out of the room and started crying and thereafter she was dragged inside the room and when she stopped crying all the accused persons i.e. father in law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law along with the husband connived together and decided some strategy. On 23.09.1998 at around 11.30 am. husband Nand Kishore Singh, father-in-law Gupteshwar Singh, mother-in-law and bother-in-law (Raj Kumar Singh) brought one litre of kerosene oil, kept in a plastic jar and mother-in-law has poured the kerosene oil and the husband has lightened the matchstick due to which fire caught her saree and the victim sustained severe burn injury. Even after raising brawl, she was not allowed to go out of the house nor the accused persons have tried to save her. The victim has stated that all the accused persons, her husband and the in-laws have tried to kill her but could not succeed. On brawl, other persons came and pour water to save the victim by putting the fire off. The victim has further stated that in due course her husband has also sustained injury, the informant has also stated that because of the presence of other people and neighbours, the victim was taken to Tata Main Hospital (T.M.H.) where she was unconscious and that is the reason, she could not know the things in an explanatory manner. Subsequently, she got conscious and gave her statement before the police in presence of Dr. Bharat.

(3.) On the basis of the fardbeyan of the victim, police registered Bagbera P.S. Case No. 199 of 1998 dated 28.08.1998 under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 498 A/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. During investigation, the victim died on 08.10.1998 and thereafter, on the request of the police officer Sec. 304 B of the Indian Penal Code has been added.