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

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 238

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, RATNAKER BHENGRA, JJ.
Rafikul Sk. @ Rafique Sk., son of Joyel Sk. @ lainul Sk. - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1287 of 2007
Decided On : 01-03-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Senior Advocate
For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, APP

The burden of proof, significance of motive, and the need for a plausible and acceptable explanation from the accused in cases of suspicious deaths are central legal principles established in the judgment.

Headnote:

Dowry Death - Indian Penal Code - Section 302, Section 304-B/34 - The court discussed the evidence and legal provisions related to dowry death and murder under the Indian Penal Code. It highlighted the importance of motive, burden of proof, and the significance of circumstantial evidence in establishing guilt. The court also emphasized the need for a plausible and acceptable explanation from the accused in cases of suspicious deaths.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife, Dilera Bibi, based on circumstantial evidence and the charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged dowry death due to non-fulfillment of dowry demands, but the trial judge acquitted the other accused and convicted the appellant based on the circumstances of the case.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. It highlighted the lack of evidence regarding how and where Dilera Bibi suffered homicidal death, and the insufficiency of the appellant's assistance during the trial.

Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of evidence to establish the guilt of the appellant for murder and dowry death, the framing of the charge, and the appellant's examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of motive, burden of proof, and the significance of circumstantial evidence in establishing guilt. It also highlighted the need for a plausible and acceptable explanation from the accused in cases of suspicious deaths. Additionally, it discussed the insufficiency of the appellant's assistance during the trial and the lack of evidence regarding how and where Dilera Bibi suffered homicidal death.

Final Decision: The judgment of conviction under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the order of sentence against the appellant were set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be set free forthwith.

JUDGMENT :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

In SC No.43 of 2006, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to RI for life and a fine of Rs. 5000/- under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Pakur (M) PS Case No. 188 of 2005 was lodged against Rafikul Sk. @ Rafique Sk., Kadyan Bibi, Joyel Sk. and Hazra Bibi on an allegation that in furtherance of common intention they have caused dowry death of Dilera Bibi due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. During the investigation the parents and uncle of Dilera Bibi gave statements to the police that she was done to death by her husband in his house. The witnesses who are co-villagers of Rafikul Sk. have however given a different version about death of Dilera Bibi. On 29.09.2005 Rafikul Sk. was arrested and he suffered a disclosure statement in which he told the Investigating Officer that on the day of occurrence when he came back home he found his wife talking to an unknown young person who on seeing him fled away and when he asked his wife about the unknown person she did not disclose his identity whereupon he became angry and started assaulting his wife. The doctor who conducted the postmortem examination on 22.09.2005 has found marks of bruises and abrasions on nostril, lips, face and right knee of Dilera Bibi. In his opinion the death had occurred due to suffocation caused by smothering.

3. A charge-sheet was filed against the above named accused and they have faced the trial on the charge under section 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, with an alternative charge framed under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. In the trial, the prosecution has examined eight witnesses out of whom PW4-Kalam Sk., PW5-Morsalim Sk., PW6-Suleman Sk. and PW7-Nurul Sk. were closely and intimately related to Dilera Bibi. They made allegations about demand of dowry against the accused and claimed that they have seen marks on the neck of Dilera Bibi. The learned trial Judge has held that no evidence was produced by the prosecution that soon before her death Dilera Bibi was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand of dowry by her husband or his family members.

5. The learned trial Judge has referred to several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to hold that the charge under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code was not proved against the accused.

6. Kadyan Bibi, Joyel Sk. and Hazra Bibi were also acquitted of the charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

7. In so far as the charge against the appellant of murder is concerned, the learned trial Judge has held as under:

"28. But I find that the deceased Dilera Bibi was murdered in his house on 21.09.05. The accused Rafikul Sk. neither informed anybody of his village regarding her death nor police. These circumstances clearly shows that the deceased Dilera Bibi was murdered by accused Rajikul Sk. He has not explained even in court about the reason of death of his wife Dilera Bibi. Circumstances clearly shows that except him nobody has committed the murder of Dilera Bibi.

29. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that no offence U/S 304B IPC has been proved against all the four accused person, accordingly, they are acquitted of the charge u/s 304B IPC Further, no charge u/s 302 IPC has been proved against the accused Joyel Sk., Kadyan Bibi and Hazra Bibi. Accordingly, they are also acquitted of the charge U/S 302 IPC They and their sureties are also discharged from the liabilities of their respective bail bonds.

30. But I am of the opinion that the prosecution has been able to prove the charge u/s 302 IPC against accused Rafikul Sk. only beyond all reasonable doubts. Therefore, I hold and declare accused Rafikul Sk. guilty U/S 302 IPC. Accordingly, he convicted thereunder"

8. Mr. A.K. Kashyap, the learned Senior counsel for the appellant would submit that there is no evidence how Dilera Bibi was murdered and the medical evidence that Dilera Bibi has died due to suffocation caused by smothering woul

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top