Conviction under Section 498-A IPC for cruelty affirmed; testimony of related witnesses deemed credible, and delayed FIR not sufficient for acquittal. Probation granted due to significant time lapse since incident.

JUDGMENT :

S.S. Mishra, J.

Three convicts have jointly filed the present appeal against the judgment and order dated 18.01.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jajpur in S.T. No. 524/39 of 1997 (arising out of G.R. Case No. 854/96), whereby while acquitting the accused persons of offence under Section 306 IPC, convicted them under Sections 498-A IPC and on the said count, each of the appellants were sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year.

2. While the appeal was pending, this Court was apprised of the fact that appellant no.2-Natabar Mallik has expired. Therefore, vide order dated 04.09.2025, the appeal against the said deceased appellant stood abated, in the absence of any motion on behalf of the legal heirs or next friend of the deceased appellants U/s.394 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the present appeal is confined to appellant nos.1 and 3.

3. None appeared for the appellants despite repeated calls. Therefore, this Court requested Mr. S.N. Mishra-4, learned Counsel, along with Ms. Swagata Laxmi Sinha, learned Counsel, who were present in Court, to assist the Court in the capacity of Amicus Curiae and they have readily accepted the same and after obtaining the entire record, assisted the Court very effectively.

4. Heard Mr. S.N. Mishra-4, learned Amicus Curiae and Ms. Swagata Laxmi Sinha, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellants and Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

5. The appellants were put on trial on charges under Sections 498- A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that Premalata Mallik, wife of appellant No.1, Naran Malik, committed suicide on 23.04.1996 after prolonged harassment meted out to her.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the marriage between the deceased Premalata and appellant No.1 was solemnised in the year 1993. After the marriage, the deceased was allegedly subjected to cruelty and harassment by the appellants in connection with demands of dowry. Because of such ill-treatment, she used to frequently return to her parental home, from where her parents would send her back to her matrimonial house. On 23.04.1996, the deceased committed suicide. The First Information Report, however, came to be lodged after about five months of the occurrence, and upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellants under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. It is pertinent to note that on the date of the alleged suicide, accused Natabar Malik had reported the matter at the police station, pursuant to which Balichandrapur P.S. U.D. Case No. 3 of 1996 was registered. During the course of investigation of the said U.D. case, inquest over the dead body of the deceased was conducted, followed by post-mortem examination. The relevant records and documents pertaining to the U.D. case were subsequently collected and taken into consideration at the time of submission of the charge-sheet.

The defence plea, as projected before the learned Trial Court, was one of total denial. The appellants categorically contended that they had been falsely implicated in the case and that the allegations levelled against them were wholly unfounded and untrue. Based on such rival pleadings, the trial proceeded in accordance with law.

7. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses. P.W.1, Dangi Dei, is the mother of the deceased. P.W.2, Sridhar Malik, and P.W.6, Natabar Malik, were co-villagers. P.W.3, Dr. Manorama Dei, and P.W.4, Dr. D.P. Sutar, were the doctors, who conduc