Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 144 of 1997. (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 13.5.1997 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah, in Sessions Trial No. 119 of 1996/ 58 of 1994) ------------ 1. NARAIN PANDEY, SON OF LATE BISHUN DEO PANDEY 2. KANTI DEVI, WIFE OF SRI NARAIN PANDEY 3. VIJOY PANDEY, SON OF SRI NARAIN PANDEY 4. DHANANJAY PANDEY, SON OF SRI NARAIN PANDEY ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE HAIBATPUR, P.S. WARSALIGANJ, DISTT. NAWADAH. ------- APPELLANTS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ------- RESPONDENT. ---------- For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Adv. For the State : Miss. Renu Kumari, A.P.P. ---------- P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: The Appellants have been convicted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years by a Judgment dated 13.5.1997 by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah, in Sessions Trial No. 119 of 1996/58 of 1994. 2. The case of the Complainant Madhusudan Pandey, briefly stated, is that his daughter Anita Devi was married with Dhananjay Pandey in the year 1989 and at the time of marriage, the accused had demanded certain articles, gold and silver but the Complainant was unable to satisfy the said demand on account of his financial difficulty. For this reason, the accused persons used to variously assault his daughter who had written many letters to him in this regard. It was alleged that on 1.5.1994, she was tied with a rope and after kerosene oil Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.144 of 1997 dt.22-07-2011 2 having been sprinkled on her, she set on fire on account of which she died. 3. The Complaint was sent for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. whereafter charge sheet was submitted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and even though, cognizance has been taken under the same Section. Charges were amended later on and the Appellants were also charged under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code along with Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. During trial, the prosecution examined nine witnesses. PW-4 Madhusudan Pandey, Complainant, has stated that his daughter had been married in the year 1989, but the “Duragaman” had taken four years after the marriage, whereafter she started living with her in-laws. He further stated that his daughter was consistently tortured by her in-laws for demands of gold and silver and on the fatal day, she was set on fire and done to death. He stated that the deceased had written two letters regarding demand of dowry and torture and he had himself seen that his daughter had not been adequately looked after by the in-laws. 5. PW-3, Draupati Devi, the mother of the deceased has stated that her daughter was married 7-8 years ago with Appellant Dhananjay Pandey and she was always tortured for demands of gold and silver. She also corroborated that the deceased had written two letters with regard to the torture being borne by her, meted out by the in-laws. Her attention was drawn towards her earlier statement recorded under Section 161 Cr. P.C. that she had not said that Anita Devi, the deceased, had written letters with regard to demands and torture, for non-fulfillment of demands. She said that she had given a photocopy of the letters to the Police. 6. PW-8 Guddu Kumar Pandey, the son of the Informant and the brother of the deceased stated that he quite often used to meet his sister Anita Devi and she had written two letters for delivery of the same Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.144 of 1997 dt.22-07-2011 3 to his father which is proved Exbt. 3 and 3/1. In cross-examination, he stated that he had gone to sister’s house on 30.9.1994 and once earlier but he did not remember the date. 7. On going through the purported letters written by the deceased, it appears that she stated that her in-laws tortured her for demand of gold and silver and she was scared for her life. 8. PW-2, uncle of Anita Devi, stated in his examination-in-chief that he did not know as to how Anita had sustained fire injuries. PW-5 another uncle of the deceased stated that he learned from the Informant that Anita Devi had been burnt to death. PW-7 Dr. R.N. Singh who performed the post mortem examination of Anita Devi on 2.5.1994, found that there was 100 per cent burn injury on the person of the deceased and the smell of kerosene from the body. 9. On behalf of the Court, Chandrika Mahto was examined as CW-1. It is note worthy that he was named in the complaint as the witness who had informed the Informant that his daughter had been killed. He stated in Court that the deceased had died of burn injury in hospital when she was cooking food. He also stated in cross-examination hat his house was next to the house of the Appellant at a distance of 10’ and he had seen her in burnt condition at 5.00 A.M. He denied to have given any information to the father of the deceased i.e. the Informant and, therefore, the evidence of Informant with regard to actual killing is demolished. 10. On behalf of the defence, three witnesses were examined. DW-1 Ram Naresh Paswan stated that the wife of Appellant Dhananjay Pandey died while cooking food. When an alarm was raised, she was taken to Warsaliganj and from there she was taken to Nawadah where she died. He stated that the in-laws had never demanded any dowry nor he heard about assault of any quarrel. DW-2 Ganga Pandit also stated Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.144 of 1997 dt.22-07-2011 4 likewise. He further stated that the maternal family of the deceased was also present at the time of cremation. He stated that the entire family i.e. the in-laws of the deceased were raising an alarm about her accidental burn. He stated that the deceased had given statement in the Nawada Hospital where she died. DW-3 Kalicharan Sharma has proved the endorsement of photocopy of Fardbeyan of U.D. Case No. 1 of 1994 of Warsaliganj P.S. (Ext.-A). 11. From the evidence of PW-4 Madhusudan Pandey and PW-3 Draupadi Devi, it is not clear as to when exactly the deceased had been married to Dhananjay Pandey. According to the mother, the deceased had been married 7-8 years ago, thus, creating a reasonable doubt as to whether death had taken place within seven years of the marriage. 12. PW-8 Guddu Kumar, the brother of the deceased has stated that allegedly the letter had been given to him on 30.3.1994 whereas the occurrence had taken place on 1.5.1994. Apart from the fact that there is considerable time lapse between the letter purportedly written and date of occurrence, it is also relevant that there is no proof on record as to whether the deceased was literate person. 13. Further, both U.D. case No. 1 of 1994 dated 3.4.1994 instituted on the death of the deceased as well as the statement of Dhananjay Pandey recorded under Section 313 Cr. P.C. claimed that in fact, the deceased had sustained burn injuries while she was cooking food for some visitors. This is also supported by the Court Witness. 14. It is note worthy that this U.D. Case was instituted on 3.4.1994 for the occurrence dated 1.5.1994. The First Information Report also mentions the date of occurrence as 1.5.1994. This demonstrates that there was 2-3 days difference between the date of occurrence and the actual death in which period, no effort was taken by the Informant to lodge a Complaint with regard to the occurrence. Instead he filed the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.144 of 1997 dt.22-07-2011 5 present case five days later i.e. on 5.5.1994. These circumstances mentioned above raise a reasonable doubt the verasity of the prosecution case and, therefore, it is difficult to sustain the conviction of the Appellants. 15. In the result, the Appeal is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence passed against the Appellants in Sessions Trial No. 119 of 1996/58 of 1994 by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah, is hereby set aside. 16. The Appellants are discharged from the liability of their bail bonds. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna Dated, the 22nd July, 2011. NAFR/S.ALI.