1. By the judgment and order, 6.10.1999, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nalbari, in Sessions Case No. 51/1997, while the two appellants stand convicted under section 306 read with section 34, IPC, the appellant No. 1 also stands convicted under section 494, IPC. While the appellant No. 2 has been released on probation of good conduct for a period of two years on executing a bond to this effect, the appellant No. 1, namely, Promod Thakuria has been sentenced, for his conviction under section 306, IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay fine of Rs. 500 and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. For his conviction under section 494, IPC, the appellant No. 1, namely, Sri Promod Thakuria has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months, both the sentences, passed against the appellant No. 1 having been directed to run concurrently.

2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be described thus: The appellant No. 1, Promod Thakuria, married one Smt. Bina Bala Kalita, though at the time of his marriage, Promod Thakuria already stood married to the appellant No. 2, namely, Smt. Nirala Thakuria. Both the accused tortured Bina Bala Kalita and deprived of her right to live in her matrimonial house as the wife of Promod Thakuria. Bina Bala Kalita informed her brother and other relatives about the conduct of the two accused. Bina's brother and her other relatives prevailed upon her to adjust to the situation. However, on 7.5.1990, Bina Bala Kalita committed suicide by hanging herself to death. On reaching home and finding his wife, Bina Bala Kalita, hanging from the ceiling of his house, accused Pramod Thakuria went to the police and informed them accordingly. A U.D. (i.e., Unnatural Death) case was registered on the basis of the information so received and, then, police visited the place of occurrence and held inquest over the dead body. After the dead body was discovered, Bina Bala Kalita's younger brother, Umesh Kalita, lodged a written Ejahar and treating the same as FIR, a case under section 498A, IPC was registered against both the accused. The post mortem report conducted on Bina Bala Kalita's dead body revealed that Bina's death was caused due to asphyxia as a result of hanging. On completion of investigation, police laid charge-sheet, under sections 493/498A/304B, IPC, against both the accused aforementioned.

3. To a charge framed, at the trial, under section 306 read with section 34, IPC, the two accused pleaded not guilty.

4. In support of their case, prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses. In their examination under section 313, Cr.PC, both the accused denied that they had committed the offence alleged to have been committed by them, the case of the defence being that of denial.

In his examination under section 313, Cr.PC, the male appellant stated to the effect that since his first wife, Nirala Thakuria, was sick, he had married Bina Kalita, but he denied to have demanded any dowry or ill-treated her. In her examination under section 313, Cr.PC, the female appellant stated that she was legally married to Promod Thakuria and she too denied that she had ill-treated Bina Bala Kalita.

5. The learned trial court, having found the two accused-appellants guilty of offence under seetioa-306 read with section 34, IPC, convicted them accordingly and passed sentences against them as mentioned hereinbefore. Having found the appellant No, 1 guilty of an offence under section 494, IPC too, the learned trial court convicted the appellant No. 1 accordingly. Aggrieved by their conviction and the sentences passed against them, the two accused have preferred this appeal.

6. I hove heard Mr. L.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the accused-appellants, and Mr. V.S. Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. I have also heard Mr. M. Mukherjee, learned counsel, who has appeared as amicus curiae, in this appeal.

7

Click Here to Read the rest of this document