In dowry death cases, prosecution must prove unnatural death within seven years of marriage with cruelty/harassment soon before by husband/relatives linked to dowry demand to raise rebuttable presumption; accused must disprove via evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

1.Heard Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwary, learned Additional P.P.

2. The instant criminal appeal is directed against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.03.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Godda in Sessions Trial No. 187 of 2018, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offence under Section 304B of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal, as depicted in the F.I.R. in a narrow compass, is that the informant’s daughter Snehlata Kumari @ Sweety (since deceased) was married with the present appellant on 30.11.2012 and out of their wedlock, a girl child namely, Bhabhya Bharti was begotten, who is at present 04 years old. It is alleged that for better education of the girl child Bhavya, Snehlata Kumari was residing at her parental house, but all of a sudden, her husband (appellant) took his wife and daughter at Lohia Nagar, Godda in the month of April, 2018 and left them in a rented house and got his daughter admitted in St. Thomas School, Godda. It is further alleged that the appellant, who is a CRPF personnel left for his duty to Rajgir at CRPF Camp. In the meantime, on 05.04.2018, the husband hatching conspiracy with his sister Shweta Jha and mother Nilam Devi committed murder of the informant’s daughter in between night of 5/6.04.2018. It is further alleged that from the beginning of marriage, all the accused persons used to quarrel with the deceased and demanded additional dowry in the shape of 1 Katha land and one four-wheeler vehicle and due to non-fulfillment of aforesaid demand the deceased was subjected to torture at hands of husband and in-laws, which was frequently disclosed by the deceased to her mother Uma Devi (informant) (P.W.-4).

4. On the basis of written report of the informant, FIR being Godda (Town) P.S. Case No. 80 of 2018 was registered for the offence under Section 304B read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. In course of investigation, the present appellant was arrested and after conclusion of investigation against him, charge sheet was submitted, keeping investigation continued against rest of the co-accused persons.

5. The case of the appellant was committed to the court of Sessions after taking cognizance of the offences, where S.T. No. 187/2018 was registered. The appellant denied the charges levelled against him and claimed to be tried.

6. In the course of trial, altogether 14 witnesses were examined by the prosecution.

P.W.-1 : Kameshwar Jha;

P.W.-2 : Manish Kumar Jha;

P.W.-3 : Dr. Pradeep Kumar Sinha;

P.W.-4 : Uma Devi (Informant);

P.W.-5 : Vikash Chandra Jha;

P.W.-6 : Dev Chand Shandil;

P.W.-7 : Sushil Kumar Jha; P.W.-8 : Banke Bihari Jha;

P.W.-9 : Tarkeshwar Harijan;

P.W.-10 : Ananjoy Kumar Thakur.

P.W.-11 : Sunita Thakur.

P.W.-12 : Rakesh Kumar Singh.

P.W.-13 : Sunita Murmu. P.W.-14 : Manju Murmu.

Apart from oral testimony of witnesses, following documentary evidences have been adduced:-

Exhibit-1 : Signature of the P.W.-2 on carbon copy of Inquest Report of the deceased Snehlata Devi @ Sweety Kumari.

Exhibit-1/1 : Signature of the informant (P.W.- 4) on carbon copy of Death Inquest Report of the deceased Snehlata Devi @ Sweety Kumari.

Exhibit-1/2 : Writing and signature of P.W.-7 on Inquest Report of