The court affirmed conviction for dowry death, highlighting evidentiary requirements under IPC and the presumption of guilt upon failure to rebut accusations.

JUDGMENT :

Alok Kumar Pandey, J.

At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant has not pressed the prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Accordingly, the said prayer stands disposed as not pressed.

2. The present appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction dated 14.05.2025 and order of sentence dated 22.05.2025 passed by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge – XIII, Muzaffarpur in Sessions Trial No. 259 of 2019 arising out of Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 189 of 2018 whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years along with fine of rupees ten thousand (Rs. 10,000/-) for the said offence. In case of default in payment of fine, appellant has to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

3. According to fardbeyan of informant (PW-5), the prosecution case, in brief, is that marriage of informant’s daughter was solemnized with the appellant on 28.03.2014. The deceased and appellant were blessed with a daughter. It is alleged that after six months of marriage, appellant and others are said to have demanded dowry of motorcycle and amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- and tortured the informant’s daughter in various ways. The informant purchased a motorcycle and gifted to his son in law. It is further alleged that again after some days, appellant and others assaulted and tortured the informant’s daughter in various ways and demanded amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- in cash for casting the roof and to visit abroad to which informant’s daughter resisted. It is further alleged that on 26.07.2018 informant’s son-in-law had to go abroad for which the informant took loan of Rs. 1 lakh and gave to his son-in- law. It is further alleged that on 13.07.2018 at about 2:00 PM the elder son-in-law of informant informed that perhaps informant's daughter was killed. On the said information, informant alongwith his son, wife and other reached to the house of informant’s daughter and saw the dead body of informant’s daughter lying on a cot and all the family members of in-laws of informant’s daughter were absconded from there. It is further alleged that a white colored soaked and smeared pillow was found from the adjacent room of informant’s daughter. It is believed that daughter of informant has been concertedly killed by pressing her mouth with pillow for non fulfillment of aforesaid demand of money.

4. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant, Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 189 of 2018 was initially instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B)/34 of the IPC and vide order dated 23.07.2018, in place of Section 302 of IPC, Section 304(B) of IPC was added. Routine investigation followed. Statement of witnesses came to be recorded and on the completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the appellant under Section 304(B) of the IPC and the learned trial court took cognizance against the appellant under Section 304(B)/34 of IPC. The case was committed to the court of sessions after following due procedure. On 15.06.2019, the learned trial court has framed charges against the appellant under Sections 304(B)/34, 302/34 of the IPC. Charges were read over and explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In order to bring home guilt of accused persons, prosecution has examined altogether twelve witnesses. PW-1 Md. Anwar, PW-2 Md. Aslam, PW-3 Md. Firoz Alam, PW-4 Md. Parwej Alam, PW-5 Md. Nisarul (informant), PW-6 Md. Salauddin, PW-7 Abdul Tohid, PW-8 Rasida Khatoon, PW- 9 Md. Amruddin, PW-10 Reyaj Ahmad Usmani @ Meraj Alam, PW-11 Md. Alauddin, PW-12 Dr. Nitish Kumar Singh.

6. Prosecution has relied upon following documentary evidence on record:-