IDRIS ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 24.7.2001 and order of sentence dated 25.7.2001 passed by Shri Rameshwar Tiwary, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Palatini at Daltanganj in Sessions Trial No. 32 of 1996 against the appellant namely ldris Ansari by which the appellant has been found guilty for the offence Under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years.

(2.) The F.I.R was given by Aliinuddiii Mian, P.W. 14, father of the deceased on 17.9.1995 at 11.30 a.m. stating there in that today in the morning at about 6 a.m. villager, Najbun Bibi W/o Gulabuddin Ansari came to his house and stated that in her well a dead body of a woman is floating and it seems that it is the dead body of the W/o Md. Idris Ansari, Saisan Bibi. He went to the well and found that it was the dead body of Saisan Bibi, his daughter. Other witnesses, Surajdeo Singh, Imamuddin Ansari, Mumtaz Mian also came and saw the dead body. They also stated that it was the dead body of Saisan Bibi. He has stated that Idris Ansari and his brother Kayumuddin Ansari had committed the murder of his daughter and threw heir in the well. He has stated that they used to torture his daughter for dowry and yesterday on 16.9.1995, she was assaulted and burn injury was caused upon her body. They used to ask Saisan Bibi to go out of their house or else bring dowry. On the basis of the said fardbeyan, police after investigation of the case submitted the charge sheet Under Section 304B/34, 201/34 of the I.P.C and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the accused persons. The learned Magistrate after taking cognizance of the offences committee the case to the court of Sessions since the case was, exclusively triable by the court of Sessions Learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Palamu after hearing both the parties and considering the evidences on record found that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the accused, Kayumuddin Ansari, who lives separately from his brother Idris Ansari and acquitted him from the charges leveled against him, but found that the prosecution has proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt against the accused Idris Ansari, appellant in this appeal and thus convicted him as aforesaid. However the charge Under Section 201 of the I.P.C was not found true against the accused Idris Ansari.

(3.) In order to bring home the charges, the Prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses. P.W. 1 Najbun Bibi, P.W. 2 Naimuddin Ansari, P.W. 3 Numan Shah, P.W. 4 Mumtaz Seikh, P.W. 5 Alimuddin Ansari, P.W. 7 Imamuddin Ansari and P.W. 9 Uraisha Bibi who are co-villagers have turned hostile, when they were cross examined by the prosecution. P.W. 6 Salim Ansari, P.W. 8 Salimuddin Ansari, P.W. 10 Fuleshwar Bibi and P.W. 11 Sulekha Bibi have been tendered for the cross examination. However P.W. 12 Suraj Deo Singh, P.W. 13 Sadiqque Ansari and P.W. 14 Alimuddin Mian, father of the deceased have supported the prosecution case.