The conviction under Sections 304B and 498A of the IPC was quashed due to insufficient evidence of dowry demand or cruelty, emphasizing the necessity of credible evidence for such serious charges.

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA)

Date : 10-12-2025

The aforesaid appeals preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Cr.P.C.’) arise out of the same judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.12.2019 and 17.12.2019 respectively, passed by the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.2, Purnea in Sessions Trial No.439 of 2018 (CIS No.439 of 2018), arising out of K. Hat (Madhubani) P.S. Case No.391 of 2018, hence these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed off by the present common judgment and order. By the said judgment dated 10.12.2019, the Ld. Trial Court has convicted all the appellants of the aforesaid appeals have been convicted under Section 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’). While appellant-Kundan Kumar alias Manikant Sinha alias Kundan Ambastha of Cr. Appeal (DB) No.142 of 2020 has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 304B /34 of the IPC, the appellants of Cr. Appeal (DB) No.456 of 2020 have been awarded a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 304B /34 of the IPC. However, all the appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under Section 498A /34 of the IPC.

2. The short facts of the case as per the written report of the informant, namely Kanchan Devi, who is the mother of the deceased (P.W.5), is that the marriage of her daughter was solemnized with Kundan Kumar alias Manikant Sinha on 19^thof June, 2017 at Purnea. She has alleged that a few days after the marriage, the appellant-Kundan Kumar alias Manikant Sinha and his entire family including brother-in-law, sister-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister/brother-in- law started indulging in inflicting cruelty and demand of dowry. She has further stated that she had given various articles to her daughter as per her capacity such as jewellery and cash as also one Maruti Swift Dezire car at the time of her marriage, however the appellants as well as other family members started making further demand of Rs.10 Lakhs cash and 2 Kathas of land and used to torture her daughter for the same. It has further been alleged that two days before the date of occurrence the informant got a phone call at around 11:10 pm from her daughter that her husband Kundan Kumar wanted to speak to her and as soon as he took the phone he started hurling abuses and threatened her of dire consequences to the extent of killing her daughter by hanging her in case his demand for Rs.10 Lakhs and 2 Kathas of land was not fulfilled. In response to the same, the informant expressed her inability to provide anything else but he did not pay heed to the same and on the date of occurrence at around 3:00 pm, while she was in the Sasural of her elder daughter, she received a phone call from her son that the deceased was being taken for cremation, but with the help of other local people, they were brought to the police station and while the dead body of the deceased was in the car, appellant- Kundan Kumar was driving the vehicle and all the family members includin