SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Gau) 721

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Utpalendu Bikas Saha, J.
Bikash Ghosh & Anr.
Vs.
State of Tripura
Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2006
Decided On: 30.08.2011

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff:Mr. S. Chakraborty, Advocate
For Respondents/Defendant: Mr. A. Ghosh, Addl. P.P.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, Section 498(A) – Learned Counsel Appearing the Appellants – Appeal is directed against the judgment and order, passed by the Judge, Fast Track Court (Additional Sessions Judge), North Tripura, whereby and whereunder, while the accused appellants, namely, got acquitted from the charge under Section 304B, IPC, were convicted under Section 498(A), IPC and sentenced to suffer and to pay a fine each, i.e. to suffer R.I. for six months – Fine money if realized shall be paid, (P. W-1) the father of the deceased, as compensation, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State –Held, Regarding investigation also, a doubt creates in the mind of this Court as P.W. 19 very specifically stated that he has written complaint as a scribe as dictated by one police officer sitting in the office room of the Officer Incharge of Kailashahar Police Station in absence of the informant (PW1) while the accused persons had already been taken into custody prior to lodging of the FIR – Therefore, there is no other option before this Court except to set aside the judgment and order as impugned in the instant appeal, as the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt – Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT

U.B. Saha, J.

1. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 15.12.2005, passed by the Judge, Fast Track Court (Additional Sessions Judge), North Tripura, Kailashahar in S.T. 113 (NT/K)/02 whereby and whereunder, while the accused appellants, namely, Bikash Ghosh and Smt. Sikha Ghosh, got acquitted from the charge under Section 304B , IPC, were convicted under Section 498(A), IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 21/2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 each, i.e. to suffer R.I. for six months. Fine money if realized shall be paid to Sri Abinash Paul, (P. W-1) the father of the deceased Shilpi, as compensation. Heard Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State.

2. The prosecution case as unfolded with the FIR lodged on 19.7.2002 by the father of the decease (P.W.1) with the Officer Incharge, Kailashahar Police Station is that the deceased Shilpi was given marriage with the accused Bikash Ghosh, the accused appellant No. 1 herein, on 21st January, 2002 as per Hindu rites and customs and after few days, when the informant went to see her daughter in her matrimonial house, the accused persons did not allow him to meet his daughter and even they did not allow the informant to take his daughter to his home on "Niyar" (a visit of the married daughter at the parental house) and they demanded for payment of Rs. 50,000 and threatened him that unless the said amount is paid, they will kill his daughter Shilpi.

3. On 11.7.2002, the informant and his son, Sri Amrit Pal (PW4) again went to meet Shilpi at her matrimonial home and on that day also, the accused persons did not allow them to see Shilpi on the same plea. It has also been stated that the deceased Shilpi used to inform the PW 1 about torture caused on her in her matrimonial house.

4. On 19.7.2002 at about 1.00 p.m. the P.W. 1 received a telephonic information from the matrimonial house of his daughter, that his daughter, Shilpi committed suicide and from one Bikash Chatterjee of Boulapassa, he came to know that on the previous day of death of Shilpi, the husband of the deceased Shilpi, and her elder sister Smt. Sikha Ghosh (Nag), the appellant No. 2 herein and the mother in-law of Shilpi, Smt. Pramila Ghosh assaulted Shilpi when she wanted to go to the house of the informant.

5. On receipt of the said information, Kailashahar P.S. Case No. 66 of 2002 was registered under Section304(B) read with Section 34, IPC and the investigation of the case was set in motion and on completion thereof, the police submitted charge-sheet against all the accused persons under Section 304(B) read with Section 34, IPC.

6. As the offence alleged against the accused persons is exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, North Tripura, Kailashahar committed the case to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar. Thereafter, the case was transferred to the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar.

7. Before transferring the case record, the learned Sessions Judge, North Tripura framed the following charge against the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The same are reproduced hereunder:

I, Shri M.C. Roy, Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar, do hereby charge you, namely--

1. Shri Bikash Ghosh.

2. Smt. Sikha Ghosh (Nag).

3. Smt. Pramila Ghosh @ Gope as follows--

That on 21st January, 2002 the marriage ceremony between Smt. Silpi Paul (Ghosh), the victim and Shri Bikash Ghosh was held as per Hindu Rites and Customs and after such marriage the victim Smt. Silpi Paul (Ghosh) was living with the family of her husband Shri Bikash Ghosh at village Boulapassa under P.S. Kailashahar. After a month of such living as husband and wife in the said house she was subjected to cruelty or harassment, both mentally and physically by her husband Shri Bikash Ghosh and her relative, namely, Smt.





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top