1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 532 of 2019

(Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)

…........

Raziya Parween wife of Abdul Monir Raza

.... Appellant.

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Abdul Monir Raza son of Late Abdul Ajij Ansari.

3. Asma Khatoon wife of Late Abdul Ajij Ansari

4. Rehana Yasim wife of Abdul Munaf Ansari

5. Abdul Munaf Ansari son of Late Abdul Ajij Ansari

….. Respondents.

….........

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kailash Prasad Deo

…..

For the Appellant

: Mr. Amresh Kumar, Advocate.

For the State

: Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl. P.P.

…..

02/29.07.2019. Heard, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for

the State.

2.

The appellant has preferred the instant criminal appeal against the

judgment dated 29.04.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVI,

Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 278 of 2016 whereby the respondents Abdul

Munaf Ansari, Asma Khatoon and Rehana Yasim (bother-in-law, mother-in-

law and sister-in-law of the victim) have been acquitted from the charge under

Sections 313 and 498A IPC along with husband of the victim Abdul Monir

Raza, who has also been acquitted from the charge under Section 313 IPC in

S.T. No.40 of 2017. The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment of

conviction has held the husband, Abdul Monir Raza guilty and convicted

under Section 498A IPC and awarded rigorous imprisonment for three years

with a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine to undergo

further rigorous imprisonment for three months.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that all the respondents

are close relatives of the husband of the victim and there is consistent and

omnibus allegation against all the persons and as such, if the husband has been

found guilty under Section 498A IPC, the other accused persons being in-laws

are also liable under Section 498A IPC. Thus, the learned trial court has

committed error in not convicting the mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-

in-law on the same set of evidence while the Court has admitted and accepted

2

the evidence so far conviction of husband under Section 498A IPC is

concerned. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that all the

persons including the husband has been acquitted by the learned trial Court

from the charge under Section 313 IPC, though the evidence of P.W.5, Dr.

Seema Sahu, who has categorically stated about medical treatment of Razia

Parween regarding her incomplete abortion done by her, as such, the abortion

has been established by the prosecution so as to convict the all respondents

under Section 313 IPC. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that

the learned trial Court while scanning the evidence has relied upon the

evidence of D.W.2, who is an accused himself to establish that all the accused

persons were living separately and thus has committed illegality by giving

wrong benefit in favour of respondent nos.2 to 4, who are brother-in-law,

mother-in-law and sister-in-law and has convicted the husband only under

Section 498A IPC though there was evidence to convict all the respondents

under Section 498A as well as 313 IPC.

4.

Learned counsel for the State has vehemently argued the case and has

submitted that on the basis of written report of the informant, Razia Parween

the case has been instituted where she has categorically stated that her

marriage was contracted as per the Muslim Rights and Rituals with Abdul

Monir Raza on 09.11.2012. At the time of marriage, a sum of Rs.65,000/- in

cash was transferred in the husband's account by way of gift on demand of the

accused persons but accused persons started demanding motorcycle and they

refused to contract marriage unless motorcycle be given, thereafter a

motorcycle, Passion Pro bearing registration no. JH-10AG-5254 in the name of

her brother n