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

The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Sen CRA 211 of 1999 Durjodhan Dey Vs.

The State of West Bengal For the appellant : Mr. Aniruddha Tewari Ms. Kausiki Bose For the State : Ms. Faria Hossain, APP Ms. Baisali Basu Heard on : 05.03.2025 Judgment on : 05.03.2025 PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.:

1. In this appeal the judgment of conviction dated 02.07.1999 and the order of sentence dated 03.07.1999 as passed in Sessions Trial No. IX (III) 99 (Sessions Case 9 (12) 96) by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nadia, 2^nd Court, Krishnagar is assailed. By the said judgment the learned trial court found accused Madhusudan Dey guilty under Sections 498A/306 IPC and thus sentenced him to suffer R.I. for three and half years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- I.D. to suffer S.I. for six months more. By the self-same judgment the said Trial Court also found accused Durjodhan Dey guilty of charge under Section 498A IPC and thus sentenced him to pay fine of Rs.

2,000/- I.D. to suffer S.I. for six months.

2. The aforesaid two convicts felt aggrieved and thus preferred the instant appeal. It is pertinent to mention herein that during the pendency of the instant appeal the appellant No. 1, Madhusudan Dey died on 05.02.2018 and as such the instant appeal stood abated as against the appellant No. 1, Madhusudan Dey vide order dated 08.07.2024. It is equally pertinent to mention herein that on 29.07.2024 when the instant appeal was taken up for hearing this Court noticed that though learned Trial Court found the appellant no. 2, Durjodhan Dey guilty under Section 498A IPC but the said Trial Court in the impugned judgment passed no substantive sentence against the appellant no. 2, Durjodhan Dey though Section 498A IPC clearly prescribes punishment with the imprisonment for a term which may to extend three years and fine. In view of such, this Court issued a suo moto Rule against the appellant Durjodhan Dey asking him to show-cause as to why the sentence as awarded by the learned Trial Court shall not be increased commensurate to the legislative provision of Section 498A IPC, in the event the instant appeal is disallowed. In answer to such Rule the appellant Durjodhan Dey files his affidavit which was affirmed on 23.09.2024 and which was taken on record.

3. For effective adjudication of the instant appeal the facts leading to initiation of the aforementioned sessions trial is required to be dealt with in a nutshell.

4. On 20.06.1993 one Mohan Ch. Dey of Village – Matiary, P.S. –

Kaliganj, District – Nadia lodged a written complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of Kaliganj Police Station stating inter alia that on the said day at 14.00 hrs. he came to learn from one habitant of Village – Jayrampur that his sister Chabi Dey consumed poison at her matrimonial home. It has also been stated in the said written complaint that soon thereafter the informant and his other brothers rushed to Village – Jayrampur and on reaching at the P.O. he found that his said sister was lying dead on the courtyard of her matrimonial home. In the said written complaint it has been stated further that the marriage of the said deceased was solemnized with appellant Madhusudan Dey (since deceased) in 1379 B.S. It has been averred further that after three years of marriage torture was inflicted upon his said sister at the instance of the family members of her matrimonial home. The said written complaint discloses further that on account of various trivial issues, the husband of the deceased and her in-laws used to assault her and thus, his said sister was unable to forebear the said torture as inflicted upon her and thus consumed poison on the said day at 12.00 hrs. and committed suicide.

5. On the basis of the said written complaint, Kaliganj P.S. Case No.

166/93 dated 20.06.1993 under Sections 498A/306 IPC was started. Investigation was taken up and on completion of the same charge-sheet under Sections 498A/306 IPC was s