The prosecution must establish a clear connection between dowry demand and the death of the victim for a conviction under Section 304-B IPC, which was not proven in this case.

JUDGMENT :

Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.

1. These appeals are directed against a composite judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30.9.2021, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court-I), Banda in Session Trial Nos. 65 of 2015 (State v. Chhangu and others) and 178 of 2015 (State v. Punna alias Puran and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 156 of 2014, Police Station Pailani, District Banda, whereby the accused appellant Chhangu has been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC, as well as accused appellants Chhote Lal, Shiv Mohan, Punna @ Puran and Urmila have been convicted and sentenced to seven years imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC; all the accused appellants Chhangu, Chhote Lal, Shiv Mohan, Punna @ Puran and Urmila have been convicted and sentenced to three years imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 10,000/- each under Section 498-A IPC and on failure to deposit fine to undergo additional imprisonment for two months each; two years imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 10,000/- each under Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act and on failure to deposit fine to undergo additional imprisonment for two months each.

2. Incident in the present case occurred on 3.9.2014 when the deceased (wife of the accused appellant Chhangu) allegedly sustained burn injuries, as a result of which she died. The inquest was conducted on 3.9.2014 on the basis of information given by the husband Chhangu at 1.10 pm. The inquest was conducted between 3.00 pm to 4.30 pm on 3.9.2014 itself. The inquest witnesses included the accused appellant Chhangu. In the opinion of the inquest witnesses the deceased had poured kerosene on herself, as a result of which she died, due to burn injuries. The body was sealed and sent for post-mortem, which was conducted on the next day i.e. 4.9.2014. The post-mortem report is on record, as per which the cause of death is ante-mortem burn injuries. Following injuries have been found on the body of the deceased:

“External Examination:

(1) superficial to deep burn whole over body except sole anterior. Skin peeled multiple places, blackish whole body .. hair, scalp burn symmetrical eye burn eyelash axillary pelvic hair. Red line present on anterior part of sole.

Internal Examination :Trachea and bronchial tree are congested with sooty particle present. Both lungs congested, on cut section carbon particles present.”

3. The record reveals that information was given to the family members of the deceased as well as the police on the date of incident itself. Though the proceedings of inquest and post-mortem were undertaken yet no FIR was lodged in the matter. The family members of the deceased were also present at the time of inquest etc. The last rites of the deceased were also performed by the accused appellant Chhangu in the presence of family members of the deceased.

4. The family members of the deceased proceeded on the premise that the deceased died having committed suicide by pouring kerosene on herself. The First Information Report in the present case has been lodged after more than a month on 10.10.2014 on the basis of a written report made by the informant on 17.9.2014. The contents of the FIR are that the informant is a resident of District Mahoba, who had married his daughter (deceased) with accused about one and a half year back and ever since the marriage, the wife was being harassed for demand of dowry by the in-laws and the husband. Deceased was physically and mentally tortured for demand of a motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/-. The deceased was also harassed by not providing her food for such reasons. The FIR further alleges that on 3.9.2014 the in-laws and husband of the deceased have poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. The report could not be lodged earlier as the informant was running from pillar to post and request is made that appropriate steps be taken in the matter. The written report, which is the basis of FIR, is on record and has been duly exhibited during trial.