JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. In these three appeals the judgment of conviction dated 26.02.2010 and order of sentence dated 03.03.2010 as passed by Learned Judge, Special Court (EC Act)-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Hooghly in connection with Sessions Trial No. 05 of 2005 (Sessions Case No. 149 of 2004) has been impugned. By the impugned judgment learned trial court found the present appellants guilty under Sections 498A/302/201/34 IPC and thus convicted them to suffer R.I for three years each with fine of Rs.2,000/-each i.d to suffer further R.I for six months for the offence committed by them under Section 498A IPC, R.I for life each with fine of Rs.10,000/-each i.d to suffer further R.I for two years each for the offence committed by them under Sections 302/34 IPC and to suffer R.I for three years each with fine of Rs.2000/-each i.d. to suffer further period of R.I for six months each for the offence committed by them under Sections 201/34 IPC with a further direction that all the three sentences would run concurrently. The convicts of the said trial felt aggrieved and thus preferred the present appeal.

2. It is pertinent to mention herein that during the pendency of the instant three appeals the appellant no.3 Rijia Bibi in CRA 180 of 2010 died and accordingly the said appeal stood abated as against her vide this Court’s order dated 27.03.2023.

3. For effective disposal of the instant three appeals the facts leading to initiation of the aforesaid sessions trial is required to be discussed in a nutshell.

4. One Sahad Ali of village Kantagarh, P.S Pandua lodged a written complaint dated 18.03.2001 with the Officer-in-Charge Pandua P.S District Hooghly, stating inter alia that his daughter Jahanara Bibi was given marriage with one Sk. Omar Ali two years back. It has been stated in such written complaint that during the said period of two years his said daughter was subjected to torture both physical and mental at the instance of her husband and his family members at her matrimonial home and finding no other alternative the matter was reported to a local party office and local Gram Panchayat. It was his further version that after marriage his said daughter was taken to Aligarh by his son-in-law where also his said daughter was physically assaulted and mentally tortured. It was the further version of the informant that during such period the informant and his wife were also assaulted physically by the accused persons. It has been stated that on the day of lodging FIR his said daughter was mercilessly assaulted to death by the accused persons particulars of whom are given in the said written complaint who are the appellants before us.

5. On the basis of aforesaid written complaint Pandua P.S Case no. 49 of 2001 dated 18.03.2021 under Sections 498A/302 IPC was started. Investigation was taken up and on completion of the same charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 498A/302/201/34 IPC against all the appellants herein.

6. Trial court record reveals that after commitment and transfer the said case record was placed in the file of the learned trial court who upon consideration of the entire materials framed charges under Section 498A/302/201/34 IPC against the accused persons. The accused persons denied all the charges as framed against them and claimed to be tried and thus the trial proceeded.

7. The prosecution before the learned trial court examined 30 witnesses in all and exhibited various documents. Before the learned trial court appellant no.1 in CRA 180 of 2010 i.e. Omar Ali examined himself as DW1. From the trend of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses, the answers as given by the accused persons in their respective examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C and from the evidence adduced by DW1 it reveals that the defence case is based on clear denial and false implication.

8. For the sake of brevity the prosecution witnesses before the learned trial court can be categorized in the following manner:-