Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA, (CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR)
DEBANGSU BASAK, BIBHAS RANJAN DE, JJ.
The State - Appellant
Versus
Shri Tarak Sikdar & Others - Respondents
CRA (DB) No.8 of 2022
Decided On : 15-04-2024
Cruelty - Acquittal under Section 498 (A)/306/302/34 IPC - Section 498 (A), Section 306, Section 302, Section 107 - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a complaint by the father of the victim alleging physical torture and subsequent suicide of his daughter due to cruelty by her husband and in-laws. The trial judge found no evidence of continuous cruelty and refused to accept contradictory dying declarations, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the alleged incident of cruelty was a single instance and did not amount to 'cruelty' under Section 498 (A) IPC. It also found no evidence of abetment under Section 306 IPC or culpability under Section 302 IPC based on the contradictory dying declarations.
Issues: The main issue was whether the alleged incidents constituted 'cruelty' under Section 498 (A) IPC, abetment under Section 306 IPC, and culpability under Section 302 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for consistent and voluntary dying declarations, and the importance of corroborative evidence when inconsistencies exist. It also highlighted the requirement for evidence of continuous cruelty to establish 'cruelty' under Section 498 (A) IPC.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the accused were directed to submit a bond for appearance before the higher forum.
JUDGMENT :
Bibhas Ranjan De, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional District Judge, North And Middle Andaman, Mayabunder in connection with Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2018 (Sessions Case No. 62 of 2017) dated 21.07.2022 whereby learned Judge found all three appellant not guilty for committing any offence punishable under Section 498 (A)/306/302/ of Indian Penal Code. All of them were acquitted and discharged from their respective bail bonds.
2. Law was put into motion by one Shri Ranjan Roy who lodged a written complaint before Mayabunder Police Station alleging, inter alia, that his elder daughter was married to Tarak Sikdar (respondent No. 1 herein) at Billiground in his house in the month of March, 2013. After marriage his daughter went to her matrimonial house and started living with her husband and out of wedlock she gave birth to a female child who was aged about two years. After marriage his daughter was subjected to physical torture by her husband and his daughter was also compelled to sleep in a separate room. She was also forced to work in the hotel owned by her in laws at Mayabunder.
3. It was further alleged that on 14.08.2017 his daughter came to his house at Billiground at about 7:00 P.M. by an Auto Rickshaw and narrated that her husband assaulted her and she sustained injury in her eye and neck. He took her daughter to Billiground Hospital for treatment. He also took her daughter to Billiground Police Station where in laws of his daughter were called in Police Station. On 15.08.2017 father in law of his daughter came to Police Station and after mutual understanding, his father and father in law of his daughter took his daughter to her matrimonial house at Mayabunder.
4. On 19.08.2017 he received telephonic information from Billiground Police Station to reach Mayabunder Hospital soon. He rushed to the hospital and came to know that his daughter set her on fire. On being asked his daughter disclosed that she lost interest to live on account of regular physical torture by her husband and parent in laws and that’s why she tried to commit suicide by putting kerosene oil.
5. On receipt of that complaint Mayabunder Police Station case No. 107/17 dated 20.08.2017 was started under Section 498 (A) IPC. Subsequently, Section 304(B)/306/302/34 IPC were added.
BACKGROUND: INVESTIGATION:
6. Investigation of this case was entrusted with one SI PR Shain Nair (PW 28). During investigation he visited the place of occurrence and prepared site plan (Ext-25). He recorded statement of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. He collected statement of victim recorded by Executive Magistrate and seized Photographs. He arrested all the accused. He collected statement of the victim recorded by Executive Magistrate at Port Blair also along with treatment sheet of the victim from G.B. Pant Hospital at Port Blair (Ext-26 collectively). After completion of investigation he handed over the case diary to SHO Mayabuder Police Station for submission of chargesheet. Accordingly chargesheet was submitted against all the appellants/accused under Section 498 (A)/304 (B)/302/34 IPC before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. After commitment cognizance was taken by the learned Judge and the case was put into trial.
7. During trial learned Trial Judge framed charge under Section 498 (A)/306/302/34 IPC and all appellant/accused denied the charge.
EVIDENCE:
8. During trial prosecution examined as many as twenty nine witnesses namely:
Shri Ranjan Roy, the complainant, as PW 1,
Smt. Gurudasi Roy (Sister in law of the complainant) as PW 2,
Shri Bankim Roy (relative of victim) as PW 3,
Shri Suresh Baral (one Panchayat Member) as PW 4,
Shri T Johnson (Executive Magistrate) as PW 5
Shri Ram Chandra Roy (Grandfather of the victim) as PW 6,
Shri SC Mazumder (Assistant Engineer of APWD) as PW 7,
Shri Bharath Sikder as PW 8,
Smt. Kamla Mondal (Safaikaramchari at GB Pant Hospital) as PW 9,
Shri P Abdul Salam
AI
The main legal point established is the requirement for consistent and voluntary dying declarations, and the need for corroborative evidence when inconsistencies exist.
Weight and utility of a dying declaration depend upon surrounding circumstances and credibility which court attaches to it, having regard to evidence led before it.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility and reliability of dying declarations, emphasizing the need for voluntariness, truthfulness, and corroboration, and the importanc....
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if they are proven to be reliable, but lack of corroboration or inconsistencies can lead to acquittal.
The court reiterated the principles governing the admissibility and evidentiary value of dying declarations, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny to ensure their genuineness and reliability.
Dying declarations may serve as the sole basis for conviction if deemed voluntary, consistent, and credible; inconsistencies must be assessed in light of surrounding facts.
Where there are more than one statement in the nature of dying declaration, one first in point of time must be preferred. Of course, if the plurality of dying declaration could be held to be trustwor....
Dying declarations can be the sole basis for conviction if found to be voluntary and credible, regardless of minor inconsistencies.
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
