IMPORTANT POINT
[The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases, particularly in murder cases where direct evidence is lacking.]

JUDGMENT :

Ananda Sen, J.

The appellants have preferred these appeals against the Judgment of Conviction and Order of Sentence dated 23rd April, 2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bokaro in Sessions Trial No.11 of 2013, whereby the appellants have been held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and appellant Pradeep Kumar Das has further been held guilty for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/-for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 (three) years and fine of Rs.2,000/-for offence under Sections 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant Pradeep Kumar Das has further been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 (three) years and fine of Rs.2,000/-for offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Appellant Pradeep Kumar Das in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 598 of 2014 is the husband of the deceased whereas, the appellants, namely, Nand Lal Das and Dulali Devi, in Cr. Appeal No.366 of 2014 are father-in-law and mother-in-law, respectively, of the deceased.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there are no materials to convict these appellants. Charge has been framed under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, but the prosecution has failed to prove that these appellants have caused death of the deceased. As per the prosecution case, the same is admittedly based on circumstantial evidence, but none of the circumstances have been proved by the prosecution, neither the chain of circumstances was complete, thus, these appellants’ conviction is bad. As per him the only ground in this case for convicting the appellants is suspicion, that some mobile call was received by the deceased, before the deceased left home, and recovery of slipper from the place of occurrence. These two circumstances are too weak circumstances to convict the appellants.

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that it has come in evidence that mobile call was received by the deceased and the said call was made by her husband. On receiving the said call, she left her house, but did not return. Later on body of the deceased was recovered where the slipper of the husband of the deceased (appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 598 of 2014) was also found, which led to the definite conclusion that these appellants had committed murder of the deceased. Further, he submits that there is consistent evidence that the appellants were torturing the deceased and money was being demanded from the informant, as cost of treatment of the deceased who fell ill earlier. These circumstances leads to the only conclusion that it is the husband, who has committed murder of the deceased.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.P.P. for the State and have also gone through the records and the entire evidence.

6. Prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of the informant, Mukteshwar Das, who happens to the father of the deceased. As per the fardbeyan of the informant, on 06.09.2012, he solemnized marriage of his daughter with Pradeep Kumar Das. After marriage, his daughter started living with her in-laws. Her husband used to assault her. About 2 months ago, her husband Pradeep Kumar Das, mother-in-law Dulali Devi assaulted her due to which she received injury on her left wrist. About 8 months ago, his daughter gave birth to a child in Nilam Hospital for which Pradeep demanded Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) but he gave Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two Thousand). After that Pradeep, his father Nandlal Das, mother Dulali Das, cousin Mihir Das started assaulting, quarreling with his daughter. Four days earlier to the date of occurrence, the in-laws left