Rajiv Roy, J.—Heard Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the sole appellant and Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, learned APP.

2. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 06.11.2023/09.11.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-13, East Champaran, Motihari by which while exonerating the other accused persons of the charges, the appellant, Md. Islam @ Phul Babu has been convicted under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years with a further direction to that the period already undergone by the convict shall be set off from the period of sentence.

3. Earlier the appeal was admitted on 29.01.2024 by the Co-ordinate Bench and the Trial Court Record was called for which has now been received.

4. As per the prosecution story, the informant, the father of the victim (PW 4) alleged that on 14.01.2013, he received telephonic information about the killing of his daughter, Afsana Khatoon by the in-laws. On receipt of such information, when he along with his son, Md. Saddam and a co-villager went to the matrimonial home, none of the accused persons were present and the villagers informed that the police has taken the body. Upon reaching Ramgarhwa Police Station, found the burnt dead body of his daughter which was later sent for postmortem.

5. The informant alleged that his daughter was married seven years ago but there was repeatedly tortured for want of dowry. Fed up with the same, she returned home and filed Complaint Case No. 772 of 2011 before the competent Civil Court, Muzaffarpur. It however, later came to be compromised on 09.05.2012 whereafter, the victim returned to her in-laws house. However, on 14.01.2013, they got the information about her killing. This led to the FIR.

6. The police investigated the matter and as the appellant chose to abscond for years, only after he was arrested about five years later on 31.12.2017, the charge-sheet no. 250 of 2017 came to be submitted against him on the same day (wrongly typed as 27.10.2018 in the judgment). The charges were framed on 08.05.2019, whereafter, the accused having denied their role in the occurrence, the trial commenced.

7. The prosecution side in support of its case put forward eight witnesses as follows:—

1. PW-1 Md. Saddam Hussain, (brother of the deceased,

2. PW-2 Md. Dildar, (cousin brother of the deceased,

3. PW-3 Noor Mohammad, (uncle of the deceased,

4. PW-4 Md. Akbar (informant and father of the deceased)

5. PW-5 Md. Phool Babu, (brother in law of the deceased)

6. PW-6 Dr. Surendra Nath Sinha, (the Medical Officer of SKMCH, Muzaffarpur who conducted postmortem)

7. PW-7 Ramayan Ram, (the second Investigating Officer) and

8. PW-8 Gauri Shankar Ram (first Investigating officer)

8. The prosecution further put forward the following exhibits:—

(i) Exhibit-1 written report,

(ii) Exhibit-2 Post Mortem report of the victim,

(iii) Exhibit-3 Charge-sheet No. 250/2017,

(iv) Exhibit-4 Signature of the Station Head Officer on the written report,

(v) Exhibit-5 Signature of the SHO on the Formal FIR.

9. PW-1 Md. Saddam Hussain and PW-2 Md. Dildar are brother/cousin brother respectively of the deceased who supported the prosecution story. They deposed that the occurrence took place seven years ago when they got the information that their sister has been burnt to death. Upon reaching there, they came to know that the police has taken away the dead body which was found at the police station. They further deposed that the deceased used to complain about the dowry demand by the in-laws and when the same was not fulfilled, she was killed.

10. PW 3 Noor Mohammad is the cousin uncle of the deceased. He has also supported the prosecution story. According to him, on information, he along with his brother (informant) and Sonu Afsana Khatoon (not examined) went to the place where no member of the in-law was present. The villagers informed that the body has been taken to the police station, went there and found the