JUDGMENT :

Uday Kumar, J.

1. Appellant Sahidul Rahaman has challenged the judgment of conviction dated 05.01.2017 and order of sentence dated 06.01.2017 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC – II, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur in Sessions Case No. 137 of 2014, Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2015 arising out of G.R. Case No. 68 of 2012, in connection with Chopra Police Station Case No. 07 of 2012 dated 8th January, 2012 under Sections 498A/302/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 convicting the appellant and sentencing him to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as fine, in default, to suffer additional rigorous imprisonment for two years six months for non- payment of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) in respect of offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and to suffer a term of three years simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), in default to suffer simple imprisonment of six months for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, while other accused persons namely Ansarul, Sapila Khatun and Sapit Md. have been acquitted from the charges under Section 498A/ 302/ 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Briefly stated, despite Nikah of complainant’s daughter Renuka Begam @ Khatun was held with appellant Sahidul Rahaman son of Sapit Mohamad on 21st February 2011, she was living at her parent’s house. On 26th December 2011 their marriage was solemnized as per sharia. Thereafter custom of Rukshudi (bidai) was observed. Since then, both started to live together as husband and wife at her matrimonial home. Unfortunately, she met to her unnatural death at her matrimonial home in the morning of 08.01.2012. Her father saw her dead body was lying on the bed at the veranda of her room. On his written complaint lodged to Officer-in-charge of Chopra Police Station, a case being No. 07 of 2012 dated 08.01.2012 under Sections 302/498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 was started against Sahidul Rahaman @ Sahidul Islam @ Sahidul, Ansarul, Sapila Khatun, Selina Khatun and Sapit Md of School Para, Daspara, Police Station Chopra, District Uttar Dinajpur. Investigating Officer visited place of occurrence, prepared suratehal report of deceased, arranged an Executive Magistrate for inquest over dead body, sent dead body to hospital for post-mortem, seized articles under proper seizure list, recorded statement of witnesses and submitted charge sheet, under Section 302/498A/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 against Sahidul Rahaman @ Sahidul Islam @ Sahidul, Ansarul, Selina Khatoon, Sapit Md. and Sapila Khatoon, upon which Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Islampur, taken cognizance of the offences and he committed this case to the Court of Learned Sessions Judge after complying the requirements of Section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, who transferred it to the Court of Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur, for trial and disposal of Sessions Case No. 137/14. Subsequent to framing of charge under Sections 498A /302/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the accused persons, trial of Sessions Trial Case No. 07 of 2015 was commenced. During trial as many as 12 prosecution witnesses were examined, 9 documents were produced and one article was marked as material exhibit. Thereafter statement of accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 wherein appellant claimed to adduce evidence in his defence.

3. Based on above evidences, Learned Trial Judge has passed the impugned order.

4. Mr. Ayan Basu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that:

i. Deceased never stated anything to her parents about strenuous relationship with appellant ever she had. Evidence of prosecution Witness Number 1, 5, 9 and 10 are not reliable and trustworthy as they are either interested witnesses or hostile witness or official