Prosecution must prove that a woman's death occurred due to dowry-related cruelty or harassment soon before death for Section 304-B IPC to apply; lack of evidence leads to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the judgment of conviction dated 14.02.2005 and sentence dated 16.02.2005 passed by Sri Ravindra Prasad Ravi, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur in Session Trial No. 353/03 by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and sentenced to undergo R.I for seven (07) years.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of fardbeyan of one Hiralal Sah recorded on 22.03.2003 at 11 hours in T.M.H police camp which has been registered as F.I.R being Parsudih P.S. Case No. 37/03 on 22.03.2003 at 19 hours. It has been alleged therein that the informant’s daughter namely Punam Devi was married to Kailash Sah about 7 years ago. After the marriage the infomant’s daughter was residing in her Sasural along with her husband and she had been blessed with two daughters namely Priyanka aged about 4 years and Riha aged about 2 years. It has been further alleged that the informants daughter used to come her Naihar and used to say that her mother-in-law, Bhaisur (elder brother of the husband) and Jethani (wife of elder brother of the husband) used to demand money for the construction of the house. The informant told to his daughter to say to the in-laws people that the informant had got no money. Since, the informant did not give money as such his daughter was burnt on 19.03.2003 at 10 P.M in the night in the house and she was hospitalized at T.M.H in BCU for treatment on 20.03.2003.

2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the Appellant and learned counsel for the State.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Court below is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court has wrongly passed the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence. It is submitted that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case under Section 304-B/34 of the I.P.C. It is submitted that the prosecution has miserably failed to substantiate the essential ingredients of Section 304-B of I.P.C. It is evident from the evidence on record that the death of the deceased had not occurred within seven (07) years of her marriage and also there is no evidence that the deceased was being tortured for or in connection with demand of dowry.

It is further submitted that the independent witnesses have not been examined by the prosecution and they have been purposely withheld by the prosecution. It is submitted that P.W-1, P.W-2 and P.W-9 have not supported the case of the prosecution although, they have also not been declared hostile by the prosecution. It is further submitted that P.W-3, P.W-4, P.W-5, P.W- 6, P.W-7 and P.W-8 are brothers, father and mother of the deceased and they are highly interested witnesses. It is submitted that the informant had fetched Rs. 1 lakh from Kailash Sah after lodging of the F.I.R has blackmailed and cheated Kailash Sah.

It is further submitted that the informant had demanded Rs. 2 Lakh from Kailash Sah for not lodging the case and further when Rs. 1 lakh was paid then he filed a petition for recording his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C for saying true facts that the accused persons had not committed any offence, they had never tortured the deceased and had demanded any money from the deceased and her Naihar people but subsequently, the Informant did not appear in the Court purposely. It is submitte