Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Tirthankar Ghosh, J.
Sukla Dawn And Another - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
CRA 672 of 2004
Decided On : 19-05-2022
Indian Penal Code - Offence under Section 498A - S.T. No. 4(4) 97 corresponding to S.C. No. 19(9) 95 - Sections 498A, 307 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code - The court affirmed the finding of guilt under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and modified the sentence for the mother-in-law, Sukla Dawn, Appellant No.1 to Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 (six) months with fine. The sentence imposed on the husband, Chirantan Dawn/Appellant No.2 was not interfered with.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved allegations of physical and mental torture inflicted upon the complainant by her husband and mother-in-law, leading to injuries sustained by the complainant and her mother. The trial court found the appellants guilty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and acquitted them for the offence under Section 307 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court affirmed the finding of guilt under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and modified the sentence for the mother-in-law, Sukla Dawn, Appellant No.1 to Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 (six) months with fine. The sentence imposed on the husband, Chirantan Dawn/Appellant No.2 was not interfered with.
Issues: The issues involved physical and mental torture, demands of dowry, and assault inflicted upon the complainant and her mother by the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the consistent version of the prosecution witnesses, the medical reports, and the absence of confrontation regarding the embellishment of facts. It also emphasized the relevance of related witnesses' testimony in cases of matrimonial discord.
Final Decision: The judgment dated 15.09.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas was affirmed, and the sentence for the mother-in-law, Sukla Dawn, Appellant No.1 was modified to Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 (six) months with fine. The sentence imposed on the husband, Chirantan Dawn/Appellant No.2 was not interfered with.
JUDGMENT
Tirthankar Ghosh, J. - The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.09.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas in connection with the S.T. No. 4(4) 97 corresponding to S.C. No. 19(9) 95, wherein the learned Trial Court was pleased to hold the appellants guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and acquitted them for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court was pleased to impose sentence upon the appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year each and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each, i.d. to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 2 (two) months for the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The records reflect that Bidhannagar Police Station Case No. 155 dated 10.12.1994 under Sections 498A/323/325/506 of the Indian Penal Code was registered for investigation on the basis of a complaint addressed by Anindita Dawn to Officer-in-Charge, Bidhannagar Police Station on 10.12.1994. The allegations made in the letter of complaint was that the complainant was married to one Chirantan Dawn on 05.03.1994 and the complainant's father on demand of the appellants gave gold jewellery, cash etc. and after some days of marriage paid a huge sum of money for construction of the first floor of the house. The complainant alleges that after few days of marriage her mother-in- law, Sukla Dawn started physical and mental torture upon her on various pretext and instigated her husband for bringing more money and jewellery from her father. When the complainant refused to such demand of her husband which was instigated by her mother-in-law, both the appellants inflicted physical torture upon her and the complainant was compelled to inform the same to her parents. On 03.12.1994 the complainant's husband being instigated by his mother assaulted the complainant and when the same was informed by the complainant to her mother and elder sister, police had to intervene when the complainant's husband at the police station accepted his mistake and prayed for mercy, as such on the said date the complainant withdrew her allegations and the complainant with the consent of the present appellants went to her paternal home. On 10.12.1994 at around 6.30 p.m. when the complainant being accompanied by his parents went to her matrimonial home, her mother-in-law abused them in filthy language and within 10/15 minutes her husband returned and in an excited manner directed the complainant and her mother to go out of their house, when the complainant's mother protested, her mother-in-law directed her husband to throw them away from their residence, when her husband started assaulting her mother and threw her at the floor and thereafter with shoes started assaulting her. Her mother sustained serious injuries at her face, stomach and other portions of the body. At that time, when the complainant went to rescue her mother she was also assaulted by her husband with shoes and took out a knife for murdering her. The complainant and her mother started shouting when the local people started approaching their residence and as a result the husband fled away.
3. The Investing Agency on receipt of the complaint commenced investigation, the Investigating Officer on completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet under Sections 498A/324/326/307/506 of the Indian Penal Code against the present appellants. Learned Magistrate was pleased to take cognizance of the offence and after supply of the copies under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was pleased to commit the case to the Court of Sessions and finally the case was transferred to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court').
4. The learned Trial Court thereafter was pleased to frame charges against the appellants und
The court established that allegations under Section 498A must be substantiated by credible evidence, and mere claims of cruelty are insufficient for conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, the admissibility of evidence from a minor witness, and the consideration of proportional....
Conviction under Section 498A of IPC requires clear evidence of physical or mental cruelty, which was not established in this case.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
