IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas Manik Shaw & Ors.

-Versus-

The State of West Bengal For the Appellants : Mr. Milon Mukherjee, Ld. Sr. Adv.

Mr. Swapan Kumar Mallick, Ms. Sudeshna Das.

For the State : Ms. Faria Hossain, Ld. APP Ms. Sonali Das.

Hearing concluded on : 04.11.2025 Judgment On : 21.01.2026 Prasenjit Biswas, J:-

1. The impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 26.02.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2^nd Court, Barasat, North 24 Parganas in connection with S.T. No. 1(8)95 is assailed in this appeal.

2. By passing the impugned judgment the present appellant being appellant no. 1 was convicted under Section 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year and the appellant Anuradha Shaw was also convicted under Section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years along with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months.

3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said impugned judgment and order of conviction the present appeal was preferred at the instance of the appellants.

4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, may be delineated as follows:

“A written complaint was lodged by Radheshyam Gupta, the maternal uncle of the deceased victim, alleging, interalia, that the deceased had been married to appellant no. 1 and that she met with an unnatural death on 30.11.1990 at the tender age of 22 years. It was specifically contended in the complaint that soon after the marriage, the deceased was subjected to persistent demands for dowry by her husband as well as by other members of her matrimonial family. Owing to the non-fulfilment of such alleged demands, the deceased was purportedly subjected to both physical and mental cruelty and torture at the hands of her in-laws. It was further alleged that on 30.11.1990, the de facto complainant received a telephonic message informing him that the victim had sustained severe burn injuries and had already been shifted to R. G. Kar Medical College and Hospital. Upon receiving such information, the de facto complainant rushed to the said hospital and reached there at about 10.30 A.M., where he found that the victim was being treated in the emergency ward. During his stay at the hospital, he was informed that the condition of the victim was extremely critical and that she had sustained about 90% burn injuries. Ultimately, the victim succumbed to her injuries. Thereafter, the defacto complainant informed the parents of the deceased about the incident and proceeded to Titagarh Police Station, where he lodged a written complaint narrating the aforesaid allegations. On the basis of the said complaint, Titagarh Police Station Case No. 308 dated 30.11.1990 was registered under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code against appellant no. 1 and other members of the matrimonial household of the deceased, and investigation was set in motion accordingly.”

5. After completion of investigation, the prosecuting agency submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons, whereupon the case was committed to the learned Trial Court for trial in accordance with law. Upon consideration of the materials collected during investigation, the learned Trial Court, by order dated 01.08.1995, framed charges against the accused persons under Sections 498A and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Consequent thereto, the trial commenced and the process of recording evidence was undertaken by the Trial Court.

6. In the course of the trial, the prosecution cited as many as fourteen witnesses in support of its case. All the said witnesses were examined on behalf of the State and their depositions were recorded. Sev