SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(SC) 551

2010 (5) Supreme 439
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. B.S. Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar, JJ.
Uday Chakraborty & Ors. — Appellants
versus
State of West Bengal — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1733 of 2008
Decided on : 8-7-2010

Headnote:(a) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 498A and 304B – Even if the complaint did not specifically make out a case of dowry demand, conviction can be made by appreciating the evidence, depositions and materials brought on record. (Paras 4 and 5)

       (2009) 13 SCC 783; (2009) 10 SCC 206 – Distinguished

       (b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 304B – ‘Soon before her death’ – When the marriage itself has not survived even for a period of two years, the entire period would be a relevant factor in determining such an issue. (Para 4)

       (c) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 156 – Police Investigation – Once the investigation is transferred to another agency, it will have power and jurisdiction to examine the witnesses afresh and filing the charge sheet. (Para 7)

       Facts of the case:

       This is an appeal against judgment and sentence u/s 498A/ 304B, IPC.

       Finding of the Court:

       Appeal has no merit.

       Result : Appeal dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

Swatanter Kumar, J. —

1.The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Arambagh convicted all the five accused persons namely, Uday Chakraborthy, Smt. Anandamoyee Chakraborthy (Appellant No. 3), Sukumar Chakraborthy (Appellant No. 2), Smt. Bela Rani Chakraborthy (Bhattacharjee) and Madhab Chakraborthy for an offence punishable under Sections 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) and sentenced them for 7 years rigorous imprisonment. No separate sentence was awarded under Section 498A of IPC on the ground that the accused persons were awarded sentence for the substantive offence of murder under Section 304B of IPC. Aggrieved from this judgment, the accused persons preferred an appeal before the High Court of Calcutta and the Bench allowed their appeal in part and order of conviction and sentence passed against Madhab Chakraborthy and Bela Rani Chakraborthy (Bhattacharjee) was set aside. However, the conviction and sentence of Uday Chakraborthy, Sukumar Chakraborthy and Smt. Anandamoyee Chakraborthy was confirmed vide its judgment dated 18th of April, 2007. Aggrieved therefrom these three appellants have filed the present appeal before this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India praying for setting aside the order of conviction and sentence and for an order of acquittal.

2.Now, we may examine the facts giving rise to the present appeal. One Ms. Mina was married to Uday Chakraborthy on 5th of June 1994. The appellant No. 2 is the brother-in-law while appellant No. 3 is mother-in-law of deceased Mina. According to the case of the prosecution, Kanailal, the father of the girl, Mina, who was later examined as PW 1 lodged a written complaint to the Officer-in- Charge, Police Station, Arambagh, Hooghly on 19th April, 1996. The complaint reads as under:-

“To

The O.C. Arambagh Police Station, Arambagh, Hooghly.

Sir,

My humble submission is that, I gave my daughter Mina’s marriage with Uday Chakraborty, elder son of Sri Lakshminarayan Chakraborty of village & P.O. Golta, P.S. Arambagh, District Hooghly two years before. Frequently after her marriage her father-in- law, mother-in-law, sister-in-law and the brothers-in-laws used to torture my daughter both physically and mentally, because my son-in-law did not stay at the house. I went to my daughter’s house for a few times. I requested her father-in-law, mother-in-law and other members of the family. I arranged for the settlement of the quarrel. After that suddenly on the last 18.4.96 (Eng) she had a feud with her husband Udaychand Chakraboty, father-in-law-Sri, Lakshminarayan Chakraborty, sister-in-law- Belarani Chakborty (Banerjee) and brother-in- law-Sukumar Chakraborty at her father-in- law’s house and the aforesaid persons admitted her at Arambagh Subdivisional Hospital after burning her on the last night, and my daughter died at that night only. My firm confidence is that the household members at her in-law’s place forcibly burnt my daughter to death. Therefore, I humbly pray before you to arrange for the punishment of such heinous criminals by the law and request reveals the actual reason of the death of my daughter.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/- Kanailal Bhattacharya”

xxx xxx xxx xxx

The couple has not even completed a period of two years of their marriage when, on 18th April, 1996, it was alleged that because of dowry, the accused and other family members tortured Mina physically and mentally and forcibly burnt her. She was taken to hospital in emergency ward and examined by Dr. Subhsh Hazra, PW 29. At that time she was conscious and able to speak. The parents of Mina were informed on that very date. Unfortunately, Mina expired on 19.4.1996 at 5.30 AM. It was noticed on the prescription written by Dr. Subhamoy Sidhanta, PW 19, that the burn was accidental. After receiving the complaint and registering the FIR (Ex.12), K.K. Hazra, the Investigating Officer (PW-31) started inquest proceedings and her body was subjected to post-mortem, which was conducted








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top