P.K. Musahary, J.

"Oh, brave new world, that hath such people in it!"

1. The prosecution story reminds me what Shakespeare, long ago, said through Miranda in Tempest.

2. A young married woman in her early twenties was found dead inside her bedroom suspended from ceiling fan by her 'chadar'. Her husband Sri Umesh Sarma informed the Sipajhar Police Station that in the evening, at around 7.30 p.m. of 30.9.2005, his wife Sanjumoni Devi committed suicide by hanging. On receipt of the said information, police registered U.D. Case No. 20/05 dated 30.9.2005, conducted inquest on the dead body and sent the dead body to Mangaldoi Civil Hospital for post mortem examination. On 4.10.2005, Chitra Ranjan Sarmah, brother of the deceased, lodged written Ejahar with the said police station alleging that his younger sister Sanjubala Devi @ Sabita, who was married to accused Umesh Sarma about one and a half year ago, immediately after marriage, has been subjected to physical and mental torture by accused Umesh Sarma, his mother and relative Hareswar Sarmah and in the evening of 29.9.2005, at about 6 p.m., he came to know that as a result of such torture, his sister Sanjubala committed suicide by hanging. On the basis of the said information, a police case being Sipajhar P.S. Case No. 161/2005 was registered under Sections 304B/34, IPC. The police, thereafter, started investigation and during the course of investigation, examined some witnesses, recorded their statements and also collected the S.C.D., inquest report and post mortem report. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons, namely, Umesh Sarma, Hareswar Sarmah and Smt. Jayanti Devi, under Section 304B, IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and charges under Section 304B/34/ 306, IPC were framed against the accused persons. The charges being read over and explained to them, the accused persons pleaded not guilty and demanded trial.

The prosecution, in order to establish the charges, examined as many as 10 witnesses while the defence examined 2 witnesses. After completion of the trial, the learned trial court pronounced the impugned judgment and order dated 6.9.2007 in Sessions Case No. 65(DMFT)/06 acquitting accused Sri Hareswar Sarmah but convicting the present accused appellants, namely, Umesh Sarma and Smt. Jaymati Devi @ Jayanti Devi, under Sections 304B/34/306, IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another 6 months for each count and providing both sentences would run concurrently. This appeal is preferred against the above judgment and order.

3. Heard Mr. J.M. Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. B.M. Choudury and Ms. K. Borah, learned Counsel, for the accused appellants. I have also heard Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

4. Mr. Choudhury, learned senior counsel, submits that the learned trial court erred in law in convicting the accused appellants under Sections 304B/34, IPC inasmuch as there is no evidence to show that soon before the death of the deceased, she was subjected to cruelty by the accused appellants in connection with demand of dowry as a result of which she committed suicide. The learned senior counsel taking me through the evidence of PW1 Sri Chitra Ranjan Sarmah and PW4 Sri Ajit Kr. Sarmah, submits that they are brothers of the deceased woman and therefore, they are interested witnesses. In his deposition, PW1 stated that after 3 months of the marriage, her deceased sister informed that her husband Umesh Sarma, his brother Hareswar Sarmah and mother have been torturing her demanding more furniture and ornaments as because she could not bring sufficient furniture and ornaments as dowry at the time of marriage. PW4 deposed in a similar manner but he stated that his sister Sanjumoni informed him that the accused persons tortur