Gora Sah, Nitai Sah and Nimay Sah vs The State of Jharkhand

Pradeep Kumar, J.—Heart the learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the state.

The instant appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 9.5.2001 and order of sentence dated 10.5.2001 passed by Sri Vinay Kumar Sinha, Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur in Sessions Trial Case No. 235 of 1998/45 of 1998 by which judgment appellant No. 1, Gora Sah has been found convicted u/s 304B and 498A/34 of the I.P.C. and he has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and 3 years respectively. Both the sentences ire directed to run concurrently. Further appellant No. 2, Nitai Sah and appellant No. 2 Nimay Sah have been convicted u/s 498A/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years.

It is submitted by learned Counsel for the appellants that conviction of the appellants are bad in law and fact of the case, since, there is no evidence against the appellants namely Nitai Sah and Nimay Sah to convict them u/s 498A/34 of the I.P.C. He has also submitted that the evidence of the hostile witness, P.W.2 was not considered by the trial court since, the hostile witness, P.W.2 Panchanan Kr. Sah is own uncle of the decease and if his evidence is consider then the prosecution case will become doubtful and as such appellants should be acquitted.

On the other hand, learned Counsel for the state has opposed the prayer and submitted that there is sufficient evidence to convict the appellants and the trial court has rightly convicted them.

After hearing both the parties and after going through the evidences on record, I find that the prosecution case was started on the basis of the fardbeyan given on 20.2.1998 by the informant, P.W.10 Devendra Sah, father of the deceased stating therein that his daughter, Asha Kumari was married to the accused Gora Sah S/O of Nitai Sah about 9 months back and after 4 months of the marriage, Gora and his father Nitai and his elder brother, Mimai at the time of Rukhsadhi of his daughter, asked him to arrange for Rs. 10,000/-, which is dowry amount not paid, as soon as possible. Whereupon, he stated that he will pay the same very soon since, he has given his daughter to them. After two months his daughter informed that for non payment of the amount his father-in-law along with her husband are torturing her, whereupon, he went to the house of his son-in-law and asked them not to torture his daughter. But, after 15 days again, his daughter sent information that if, money is not paid, they will torture her to death. Then he sent his son, Munna Sah to her sasural, who came back with his daughter to his home. When his daughter came back to his house, then immediately after 10 days on 18.2.1998 his son-in-law came to the sasural in the house of the informant. They gave good reception to him and he was not happy. On the next day he took his wife i.e. the deceased, Asha Kumari for roaming in the village and after sometime he returned alone. When they asked about their daughter, he told that she had gone for easing herself and will return after sometime. After that he stated that since, he has some urgent matter he immediately after collecting his belonging returned to his home. When her daughter did not return after one hour, then they went in search of their daughter and during search they found their daughter was done to death by strangulation by the appellant, Gora Sah. Other villagers have also seen the dead body. He alleged that firstly the 3 appellants tortured the victim girl for dowry and lastly when she came back to her father''s house, then the appellant, Gora Sah came and committed her murder.

On the basis of the said written report, police registered a case u/s 304B read with Section 109 of the I.P.C. against the accused and after investigation submitted charge sheet. Since, the case was exclusively triable by the court of Sessions, Learned C.J.M. committed the case to the court of Sessions Judge and finally the case was tried by Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur, who found the appellants guilty and convicted and sentenced them as aforesaid.

It appears that in course of examination the prosecution has examined 14 witnesses to prove its case

P.W.1 is Lakhinder Sah

P.W.2 is Panchanan Kr. Sah

P.W.3 is Sukha Sah

P.W.4 is Gunadhar Thakur

P.W.5. is Jugun Sah

P.W.6 is Raghubir Goswari have all turned hostile.

P.W.7 is Shyam Sunder Sah

P.W.8 is Munna Sah

P.W.9 is Champa Devi

P.W.10 is Devendra Sah, informant of the case

P.W.11 is Dr. Binay Kumar

P.W. 12 is Raghunath Mandal, formal witness, proved formal F.I.R. marked as ext. 4.

P.W.13 is T.P. Singh, Investigation Officer of the Case.

P.W.14 is Anil Kr. Sah, witness of inquest.

From the evidences, it appears that P.W.10, informant has fully supported the prosecution case and stated in court that at the time of marriage when the girl was leaving the house for her sasural, all the three appellants demanded Rs. 10,000/- and said that the part amount of the dowry should be given immediately to which he agreed. He has stated that she was married only 9 months before the occurrence. He has also stated that when the accused persons started torturing the daughter for the unpaid dowry, the he had gone there and asked them not to torture, but after 10 days again, she informed that she will be killed, if the amount of dowry is not given. Then he sent his son to brought her to her father''s house. It is stated that when the victim came to her Sasural then immediately after few days on 18.2.1998 the accused Gora Sah came. He was very angry, although they gave him good reception. On 20.2.1998 the accused, Gora Sah took his daughter, Asha Kumari for roaming in the village and after sometime he came back alone and on inquiry, he stated that his wife, Asha Kumari had gone for easing and she will return afterwards. Then he stated that he has got some urgent work and took his belonging and immediately left for his house. When Asha Kumari did not return he along with other started searching their daughter and found the dead body. It appears that she was done to death by strangulating her neck. In his cross examination he stated that other villagers also saw the dead body of the victim girl and he has stated about the occurrence to them also. The informant has been corroborated by the evidence of P.W.7, Shyam Sunder Sah who also stated that the victim girl used to be tortured then he had gone to the sasural and brought her back, but just after 10 days on 18.2.1998 the accused Gora came and on 20.2.1998 he took his sister for a walk and thereafter he returned alone. On inquiry, he stated that she had gone for easing and saying that he has got urgent work in his village, he took his belonging and left immediately. After sometime when his sister did not return, they started searching for her and found her dead body. It appears that she was done to death by the accused. P.W.8, Munna Sah has also stated the same fact that the victim girl used to be tortured by all the three appellants for dowry and she informed that danger had gone high and she may be done to death. Then she was brought to her lather''s house, but on 18.2.1998, the appellant Gora Sah came and caused the death of the victim girl while he had gone out with her in the village. Thereafter, he came alone arid left the village. P.W.9, Champa Devi has also supported the prosecution case. The Doctor, P.W.11 Binay Kumar, who had conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body and proved the post mortem report marked as Ext.2 also stated that the victim died due to asphyxia resulting from ante mortem strangulation. In that view of the matter, I find that the prosecution witnesses have fully proved the case beyond reasonable doubts that appellant, Gora Sah, with full preparation and intention, came on 18.2.1998 to his sasural, since, due to constant torture, the victim girl had come back to her father''s house just 10 days back and while he was roaming in the village, strangulated her to death.

As far as the argument of Counsel for other appellants are concerned, he has submitted that P.W.2, Panchanan Kr. Sah, who is uncle of the deceased had turned hostile and stated that the informant had said nothing to him and he had only made hulla that body of the victim, Asha Kumari is lying near the pahari nala of the village. Whereupon, the informant came and said nothing. This witness should have teen considered by the trial court.

From the evidence of P.W.2, I find that, although, lie turned hostile, but his earlier statement given by him to the Investigating Officer were shown to him in the court where he had stated that on hulla when he went there he saw the dead body which had mark of throttling of neck and thereafter, the informant, Devendra Sah told him that his. son-in-law had done the same. Investigating Officer in para 13 he was asked about the previous statement and in para 6 in his examination in chief he has stated that witnesses Panchanan Kr. Sah stated during investigation that he had seen the dead body of the victim girl which had mark of pressing of neck and she was done to death by pressing of neck. Thereafter, the informant came and stated that his son-in-law has done it for the money not given to him. Thus, although the trial court has not discussed it, since he has turned hostile, it appears that in collusion with the appellants he had given different statement in the court and before the Investigating Officer. As such, his statement in the court is irrelevant, since, he was trying to contradict from the previous statement. The other hostile witnesses have also stated that they have seen the dead body, while P.W.4 has stated that from seeing he dead body, it was apparent that it was murdered, although, be has not stated about the entire occurrence. All the other hostile witnesses have stated that they saw the dead body of the victim girl which had mark of strangulation.

In that view of the matter, from the evidences discussed, it is clear that just after marriage, while the girl was being taken to the sasural, three appellants demanded dowry and a promise was made by the informant. After few months, they again started torturing the victim girl which she complained and informant went there, but again they started torturing her, whereupon the victim sent information that she will be murdered. Then the informant sent his son, P.W.2, who brought her back. Just after 10 days, appellant, Gora Sah came with full intention and knowledge, while he took her out for roaming in the village on 20.2.1998, he committed her murder, left Ids house immediately.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that there is no illegality in the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court.

In the remit, the appeal is dismissed having no merit.