The judgment established the importance of clear mens rea to convict under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and highlighted the duty of the court to elicit the truth at all stages of the trial.

GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA

1. THIS appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 21st September 2006, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Dinhata in Sessions Case No. 61 of 2006 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 3 (May 2006) 2006 convicted the accused-appellant of an offence punishable under Sections 498A/306 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC and further sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment of 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentenced to pay fine of a sum of Rs. 3000/- and 6000/- respectively, in default to undergo further imprisonment. Two of the accused persons namely Harish Ch. Barman and his wife Kalpana Barman were acquitted of the aforesaid charges.

2. The facts and circumstance of the case briefly stated are as follows: - THE deceased Anita died of poisoning on 24th September, 1999. A written complaint was lodged by the father of the deceased on 28th September, 1999 alleging that the marriage took place before 7/8 years from the date of the alleged incident. During the period of 3/4 years after the marriage the couple lived peacefully. Thereafter the accused-appellant demanded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- by way of dowry which the de facto complainant was unable to pay. Consequently the victim was tortured both physically and mentally. The accused Harish Ch. Barman and Kalpana Barman aided and assisted the appellant in committing the torture. The de facto complainant had been able to ascertain that on 23rd September, 1999 during the night all the accused persons assaulted the deceased very severely and provoked her to commit suicide. It was alleged that there was an illicit relationship between the accused-appellant and the accused Kalpana Barman the wife of the accused Harish Ch. Barman. The case was investigated and all the three accused persons were charge sheeted and tried which ultimately culminated in conviction of the accused-appellant. The learned Trial Judge in convicting the appellant advanced the following reasoning:- In the present case, the parents of the victim, who are very poor, have deposed that there had been no trouble in the life of the victim during the first seven years after her marriage, but, thereafter, trouble started with the demand of Rs. 10,000/- by the husband of the victim, who was treated with physical assaults by her husband, until and unless, she could bring the money, and she failed because of the poverty of her father, undeniably and she faced more assault and she found the only route of escape, i.e. by committing suicide, extinguishing her own life, because, she had no pleasure or attraction in living any more, because her own husband was using her to extort money from her poor father. This situation, requires to be perceived by a Court of law, in order to, comprehend the reasons of committing suicide by helpless women and deliver justice to the aggrieved and act as a deterrent forced preventing such crimes. The parents of the victim, did not falsely accuse their son-in-law, by exaggeration of torture and death within seven years of the marriage to attract section 304B of the I.P.C or, any imaginary story of torture, but, with only, what they experienced, either having seen personally, or, hearing from their daughter, the victim. So, I consider the evidence of the parents of the victim as reliable and trustworthy as recorded before me. I have found that, particularly, their allegation of torture by their son-in-law on the victim, on demand of Rs.10,000/- has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. They have explained that because of their poverty they could not meet up the demand of their son-in-law (accused) and that, how their daughter(victim) suffered torture for their inability to pay that money to her husband. That situation, a compelling circumstances under which the victim suffered, has to b