✦ High Court of India

Patna High Court

Case Details

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.53 of 2001 (Appeal against the Judgment and order dated 24/25.1.2001 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif, in Sessions Trial No. 443/122 of 1997/97) =========================================================== 1. Rajni Kumari @ Sindhu Kumari, daughter of Bhagwan Sah of Sasbahana, P.S. Aariyari, Distt. Sheikhpura, present residing at Rajgir, P.S. Rajgir, Distt. Nalanda. Indu Devi, daughter of Bhagwan Das, r/o Warsaliganj, P.S. Warsaliganj, Distt. Nawada. 2. 3. Sudhir Sao @ Sudhir Kumar, son of Bhagwan Das of village Sasbahana, P.S. Aariyari, Distt. Sheikhpura. 4. Bhagwan Sao @ Bhagwan Das, son of late Bihari Sao, resident of village Sasbahana, P.S. Aariyari, Distt. Sheikhpura. 5. Sharda Devi, wife of Bhagwan Sao of village Sasbahana, P.S. Aariyari, Distt. Sheikhpura. 6. Anil Sah, son of Bhagwan Sao @ Bhagwan Das of Tulsigali Rajgir, P.S. Rajgir, Distt. Nalanda. 7. Sunil Sah @ Sunil Sao, son of Bhagwan Das @ Bhagwan Sao, resident of village Sasbahna, P.S. Aariyari, Distt. Sheikhpura. Versus .... .... Appellant/s The State of Bihar

Legal Reasoning

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kr. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Adv. For the State : Mr. C. Jawahar, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 16-12-2013 Anjana Prakash, J: It has been submitted that the Appellant No. 4 has passed away during pendency of this Appeal and, hence, his Appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous. 2. The Appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 304B/34, 498A and 201/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and three years and a fine 2 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.53 of 2001 dt.16-12-2013 2 / 6 of Rs.500/- in default of which further simple imprisonment for three months and one year respectively by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda, at Biharsharif, by a Judgment and order of conviction dated 25.1.2001 in Sessions Trial No. 443/122 of 1997. 3. The case of the Prosecution according to Sanjeet Kumar is that his sister Sunita Devi had been married with the Appellant Anil Sah about two years ago. When his sister returned from her in-laws house, she complained against the in-laws of torturing her for ends of dowry. Three months prior to the death of Sunita Devi, while she at her parent’s house, Appellant Anil Sah had come there but the deceased was not wiling to go with him since she feared danger to her life. However, on his assurance, she went with her husband but wrote a letter saying that she was being tortured. On the night of 20/21.10.1996 at 3.00 A.M., the Police Party reached the house of the Informant and informed him that his sister had died at which he went there. When they opened the door, they recovered the dead body of his sister from a gunny bag. 4. The case of the Defence was of total denial and that the marriage between the parties had taken place about nine years ago and Sunita had committed suicide because she had not borne any children. 5. During Trial, the Prosecution examined eleven witnesses. PW-1 Kishori Sah, PW-2 Gopal Upadhyay, PW-3 Sri Yadav and PW-4 Deonandan Sah have given a different version for death of the deceased. 3 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.53 of 2001 dt.16-12-2013 3 / 6 6. PW-1 Kishori Sah has stated that the deceased was the wife of the Appellant Anil Sah who died on account of burn injuries. He stated in his cross-examination that the deceased had sustained burn injuries. There was an alarm upon which he had reached the house along with the rest of the Mohalla people. The house was locked from inside and the Appellant Anil Sah was not inside the house. He was then called Anil Sah at which the deceased was brought out in an injured condition. The Appellant Anil Sah was dispatched to bring the Doctor but in the meanwhile, the deceased died. He stated that the deceased and her husband had a good relationship. 7. PW-2 Gopal Upadhyay has also given more or less the same version. PW-3 Sri Yadav, PW-4 Deonandan Sah both have supported the factum that an alarm being raised which they went to the place of occurrence and found the house locked from inside and that Appellant Anil Sah was not there and he was summoned and, thereafter, sent to call the Doctor, but in the meanwhile, the deceased died. 8. PW-5 Ravindra Kumar, uncle of the deceased stated that Sunita Devi had been tortured for ends of dowry and, thereafter burnt to death. He also stated that the Police had come to give them information about this occurrence at which he had gone to her house and found her dead body tied in a Jute sack. However, there is mention of any seizure list having been prepared on recovery of the dead body. 4 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.53 of 2001 dt.16-12-2013 4 / 6 9. PW-6 Sanjit Kumar is the Informant who supports the factum of the occurrence as per the First Information Report. However, from his evidence also, I do not find any mention of seizure list having been prepared upon recovery of the dead body from the Jute sack. Some letters were shown to him but he denied knowing the handwriting. 10. PW-7 Shaila Devi is the mother of the Informant who also stated like her son about the manner in which they had been informed and about recovery of the dead body. However, even though she accepts that her daughter used to write letters to her but she does not produce any letter herself. Some letters were shown to her allegedly written by the deceased but she denies knowing the handwriting. 11. PW-8 Premchand Gupta is the uncle of the deceased who supports the factum of marriage and death within seven years of marriage and torture, just soon before her death. 12. PW-9 Dr. Ravi Ranjan Rajesh who held the postmortem found the deceased having died on account of burn injuries. 13. PW-10 is the Investigating Officer of Rajgir Thana who stated that he got information that the deceased had been killed by her in- laws at which he went there and found the door locked from inside even though, some women were present in the house. He then went and informed the Informant and got the door opened and found the dead body under straw. Once again he also does not say anything about 5 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.53 of 2001 dt.16-12-2013 5 / 6 preparation of the seizure list of the dead body. 14. 15. PW-11 Rajaram Prasad is a formal witness. On behalf of the Defence, seven witnesses were examined. DW-1 Bikas Kumar Gupta stated that the marriage had taken place much earlier. DW-2 Raju Singh is also on the same point. DW-3 Sateyendra Kumar Mishra has proved some medical reports of the deceased. DW-4 Dr. Arun Kumar Mishra has stated about the deceased having come to him for not being able to get pregnant. DW-5 Umesh Sharma has proved certain summons whereas DW-6 Birendra Thathera has also stated about the deceased having committed suicide and that there was good relationship between the spouse. DW-7 Sheonandan Prasad has also stated about the marriage having taken place earlier. 16. On going through the evidence, I find that admittedly, PW- 1 and 4 as discussed above have given a different version about the manner in which the deceased lost her life. There is no reason why they should be disbelieved in absence of any suspicion upon their veracity. Hence, relying on their evidence, I am inclined to give benefit of doubt to the Appellants. 17.

Decision

Hence, the Appeal is allowed and the surviving Appellants are acquitted of their charges. The order of conviction and sentence dated 24/25.1.2001 passed against the surviving Appellants in connection with Sessions Trial No. 443/122 of 1997/97 by the 3rd 6 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.53 of 2001 dt.16-12-2013 6 / 6 Additional Sessions Jude, Nalanda at Biharsharif is, hereby, set aside. 18. The Appellants are discharged from the liabilities of their respective bail bonds. (Anjana Prakash, J) Patna High Court, Patna. Dated, the 16th December, 2013 NAFR/S.Ali

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments