IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (DB) No.370 of 2018

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2011 Thana- TEGHRA District- Begusarai

………

{Against the Judgment of acquittal dated 31.01.2018 passed by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge-I, Begusarai, in Sessions Trial No.39 of 2014}.

======================================================

Shambhu Prasad Sah @ Shambhu Prasad, son of Late Ram Bhaiju Sah alias

Late Rambhajju Prasad, resident of village-Suryagarha Bazar, P.S.

Suryagarha, District-Lakhisarai.

... ... Appellant.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mantosh Sah, son of Upendra Sah.

3. Upendra Sah, son of Late Maksudan Sah.

4. Santosh Kumar Sah, son of Upendra Sah.

5. Lilawati Devi, wife of Upendra Sah.

6. Shobha Devi, wife of Santosh Sah.

All residents of village near Congress Office, P.S. Teghra, District-

Begusarai.

... ... Respondents.

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant

:

Mr. Lalan Kumar, Advocate.

For the State

:

Mr. Mayanand Jha, A.P.P.

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR

SRIVASTAVA

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR

MISHRA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR

SRIVASTAVA)

Date : 31-07-2018

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the point

of admission as well as I.A. No.1187 of 2018, which has been

filed under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The appellant has preferred this criminal appeal

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.370 of 2018 dt.31-07-2018

2/4

against the impugned Judgment of acquittal dated 31.01.2018

passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Begusarai, in

Sessions Trial No.39 of 2014, by which and whereunder he

acquitted the respondents no.2 to 6 of the charges framed under

Section 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The appellant lodged Teghra P.S. Case No.180 of

2011 for the offences under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian

Penal Code against the respondents no.2 to 6, when he learnt

that his daughter was burnt to death by the respondents no.2 to 6

due to non-fulfillment of the illegal demand of dowry.

4. The respondents no.2 to 6 were put on trial and

stood charged for the offences punishable under Section 304B

read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. In course of trial, the prosecution examined,

altogether, six witnesses and also got exhibited certain

documents. The respondents no.2 to 6 got examined two

defence witnesses and got proved the injury reports.

6. Learned trial court having analyzed the evidences,

available on the record, came to conclusion that the prosecution

failed to prove the ingredients, as required under Section 304B

of the Indian Penal Code.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.370 of 2018 dt.31-07-2018

3/4

challenged the impugned Judgment of acquittal, arguing that the

learned trial court failed to take notice of this fact that the door

of the room was found partially burnt and the aforesaid

circumstance goes to show that the deceased was caught fire in

a room but the learned trial court having relied upon the injury

reports of the respondents no.2, 3 and 4 acquitted the

respondents no.2 to 6, treating the death of the deceased as an

accidental death.

8. Having heard the above stated contentions of the

learned counsel for the appellant, we went through the record.

9. We find that the learned trial court has discussed

all the evidences in proper manner and, furthermore, we find

that, in course of trial, the defence got exhibited the injury

reports of the respondents no.2, 3 and 4. Furthermore, we find

that the defence successfully proved this fact that the respondent

no.2 got 60% burn injury, whereas the respondents no.3 and 4

also got burn injury,