Back
High Court Of Jharkhand
Judgename : S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA, LAKSHMANA RAO
SARO RANA AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF JHARKHAND, RESPONDENT - Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL 168 Of 2002
Decided On : 06/23/2004
Dowry Death - Criminal Law - Section 304 B IPC, Section 201/34 IPC - The court discussed the demand for construction of a house, the definition of dowry, and the absence of evidence of harassment or torture just prior to the death of the deceased. The court highlighted the lack of evidence to support the allegations of dowry demand and harassment, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the murder of Renu Devi, who was allegedly killed by her husband and in-laws due to a demand for money for construction of a house. The prosecution and defense presented conflicting evidence regarding the circumstances of Renu Devi's death.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no conclusive evidence of dowry demand or harassment leading to Renu Devi's death. The court highlighted the lack of evidence to support the allegations and emphasized the absence of harassment or torture just prior to the death of the deceased.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the demand for money for construction of a house, the definition of dowry, and the presence of evidence of harassment or torture just prior to the death of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of evidence to support the allegations of dowry demand and harassment. The court emphasized the absence of harassment or torture just prior to the death of the deceased, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Final Decision: The court acquitted all the appellants from the charges under Sections 304b/34 and 201 /34, IPC, and ordered the release of the appellants from custody.
LAKSHMAN URAON, J.
( 1 ) APPELANTS. HAVE preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30th April, 2002 passed by Shri Sita ram Mahato. learned 1st Additional Sessions judge, Deoghar in Sessions Trial No. 47 of 2001/19 of 2001 convicting the appellants under Section 304 B IPC and sentencing to undergo R. I. for life and further convicting them under Section 201/34 [pc. but no separate sentence under the said section was passed against the appellants.
( 2 ) THE prosecution case has arisen on the written information (Ext. 1) lodged bv informant Leela Devi (PW 11) on 27-7-2000 at 15. 45 alleging therein that her daughter renu Devi (since deceased) was married with appellant No. 2 Shyam Sundar Rana of kurmidih in the month of May. 1997. Shyam sundar Rana was demanding money for construction of house. As the informant was unable to pay, hence on 25-7-2000 appellant No. 2 Shyam Sunder Rana and his family members, who are the remaining appellants, murdered Renu Devi and threw her dead body into the well. They also burnt the dead body. All the appellants are resident of village Kurmidih within the jurisdiction of Madhupur P. S. , District Deoghar.
( 3 ) PROSECUTION examined 14 witnesses in order to support its case. PW. 1 Sukhsagar choudhary, PW. 2 Jaldhar Rana, PW. 3, naresh Rana. PW. 4. Bal Kishan Bhaiya and pw. 5 Nawal Singh are hostile witnesses. PW. 6 Kunt! Kumari and PW. 7 Sukhdeo Sharma are the eyewitnesses who have deposed that renu Devi fell down into the well while taking bath along with PW. 6. PW. 7 Sukhdeo sharma rushed there and saw Renu Devi fallen down into the well and she had died. The information was given to her parents by Shyam Sundar Rana himself. PW. 8 rajesh Prasad Sharma is the brother of the deceased. PW. 9 Rajendra Prasad Sharma received information that Renu Devi is serious. PW. 10 Ram Lal Sharma, PW. 11 Leela devi (informant and mother of the deceased ). PW. 13 Mahendra Sharma (uncle of the deceased) and PW. 14 Manu Kumar Sharma (brother of the deceased) have developed the prosecution case and have alleged regarding demand of money and for non-fulfilment of the demand, torturing Renu Devi causing her death and throwing the dead body into the well. PW. 12 Kaushalendra Kumar jha is the Investigating Officer of this case.
( 4 ) THE defence has also examined DW. 1 maleshwar Pd Rana, DW. 2. Shyam Sundar rai and DW. 3 Durga Pd Rana who have deposed that Renu Devi met with accidental death due to fall into the water while she was taking bath. They have also deposed that there was cordial relationship in between her and her husband appellant No. 2 shyam Sundar Rana. The learned 1st Addl, sessions Judge, Deoghar relying the evidence of PWs. 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 and PW. 14, convicted these appellants under Section 304 B IPC and also 201/34 IPC for disposing of the dead body in absence of the parents of the deceased Renu Devi. B. Challenging the order of conviction and sentence passed by learned 1st Additional sessions Judge, Deoghar, the learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that prior to the alleged occurrence, there was never any demand of dowry from the parents of the deceased Renu Devi, rather they were leading happy marital life which has been corroborated by the hostile witnesses pw. 1, PW. 2, PW. 3, PW. 4 and PW.
( 5 ) IT was submitted that Renu Devi went to the well to take bath and bring water, but unfortunately she slipped into the well and died which gets support from the evidence of PW. 6 Kunti Kumari who was also taking bath along with Renu Devi at the well. On her halla, the other villagers went there and took out the dead body of Renu Devi. This also gets support by the evidence of PW. 7 sukhdeo Sharma regarding accidental fall due to slip of Renu Devi into the well. All these witnesses have deposed that there was cordial marital relationship in between shyam Sundar Rana and the deceased. There was never any demand of dowry from the parents of t
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
