Full Judgment
S.K. Pande, J.
1. The A.S.J., Sehora in S.T. No. 662/95 vide impugned judgment dated 11-10-2001 recording conviction of accused/appellants under Sections 498A, 304B of IPC sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 3 years and 7 years respectively and to pay fine Rs. one thousand, three thousand, in default to suffer further imprisonment for a period of three months, six months. Being aggrieved, the accused/appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C.
2. Admittedly, Jarina was legally married wife of accused/appellant Sheikh Vaheed. Accused/appellants Sheikh Raseed and Hamidan Bi respectively are brother and mother of accused/appellant Sheikh Vaheed. After marriage, late Jarina was living in the joint family of accused/appellants. Within four years of her marriage she died of extensive burns on 3-5-95. On information the Merg 53/95 was registered by the Police. Preparing Panchnama (Ex. P/7) the dead body was sent for post mortem. As per post mortem report (Ex. P/2) 3rd and 4th degree burns all over the body except scalp and distal part of feet were found. Due to 100% burn late Jarina died. From one of the rooms of the residential accommodation, a container of kerosene, match box and other articles were seized (Ex.P/1). While investigating the Merg 53/95, S.I. R.S. Parihar concluded that soon before the death late Jarina was subjected to harassment relating to demand of dowry. She was not even permitted to visit her parents. Consequently, recording F.I.R. (Ex.P/1) Crime No. 176/95 under Section 304B of IPC was registered. Completing the investigation the accused/appellants were charge-sheeted. They abjured the guilt. However, the A.S.J. vide impugned judgment recording their conviction under Section 498A and 304B, IPC sentenced them accordingly.
It is contended that late Jarina was never subjected to any harassment relating to demand of dowry and simpliciter committed suicide. The case of dowry harassment and dowry death has not been proved properly.
3. It is submitted that late Jarina was wife of accused/appellant Sheikh Vaheed. Accused/appellants Sheikh Rasheed and Hamidan Bi respectively are brother and mother of accused/appellant Sheikh Vaheed. In the joint family late Jarina Bi was living with the accused/appellants. She died on 3-5-95 of 100% burn. On her death information was given to the Police and Panchnama (Ex P/7) was recorded. The dead body of late Jarina was sent for post mortem. PW/4 Dr. D.K. Saklle performed the post mortem. As stated she died of 100% burn. At the time of death she was carrying five months pregnancy. Accordingly, report (E. P/2) was recorded.
PW/2 Sukratdeen, PW/3 Subhratan Bi are father and mother of late Jarina. These witnesses have stated that soon after the marriage, accused/appellants started demanding golden ring and sofa set. Since these articles were not given, late Jarina was harassed and tortured. PW/2 Sukratdeen and PW/3 Subhratan Bi also have stated that on return from family of accused/appellants, late Jarina narrated the demand made by the accused/appellants and consequential harassment-torture. These witnesses have further stated that 15 days before the death of the Jarina their son PW/9 Sheikh Imam had been to the house of accused/appellants. He wanted late Jarina to take her to the parents. However, accused/appellants demanding golden ring and sofa set refused to permit late Jarina to go with brother PW/9 Sheikh Imam. Thereafter they received information that late Jarina died of burns. The aforesaid statements of PW/2 Sukratdeen and PW/3 Subhratan Bi are amply corroborated by PW/9 Sheikh Imam. This witness PW/9 Shekh Imam has stated that accused/appellants were demanding golden ring and sofa set. Due to financial inability, the demand of accused/appellants was not fulfilled. Therefore, they were harassing and torturing late Jarina. Late Jarina told to PW/2 Sukratdeen, PW/3 Subhratan Bi and PW/9 Sheikh Imam that she was being harassed by accused/appellant and at times was also beaten. PW/9 Sheikh Imam has further stated that 15 days before the death of late Jarina, he had been to accused/appellants for permission to take late Jarina to her parents. There also the accused/appellants demanded golden ring and sofa set. For not fulfilling the demand aforesaid accused/appellants did not permit late Jarina to go to parents with PW/9 Sheikh Imam. On refusal late Jarina wept bitterly and further narrated to PW/9 Sheikh Imam that accused/appellants are demanding golden ring and sofa set. Since their demand has not been fulfilled, they were harassing. As stated, by PW/9 Sheikh Imam late Jarina narrated the incident of harassment by saying that if the demand aforesaid of accused/appellants is not fulfilled, they would kill her. PW/9 Sheikh Imam has further stated that a few days after he received the information that late Jarina died of burn.
4. The aforesaid statements of PW/2 Sukratdeen, PW/3 Subhratan Bi and PW/9 Sheikh Imam clearly demonstrate that from the side of accused/appellants there was a demand of golden ring and sofa set in dowry. The accused/appellants were persisting their demand. However, it was not fulfilled due to financial inability of PW/2 Sukratdeen. PW/9 Sheikh Imam had been to the house of accused/appellants only 15 days before the death of Jarina. At that time also accused/appellants directed PW/9 Sheikh Imam to fulfil the demand then only late Jarina to be permitted to visit her parents. Late Jarina on that occassion also stated to her brother PW/9 Sheikh Imam that if the demand of accused/appellants aforesaid is not fulfilled they shall kill her. As against aforesaid, there is no evidence to suggest how witnesses are falsely implicating the accused/appellants. DW/1 Indrapal Mahobiya in cross-examination has admitted that he never had any talk with late Jarina. Another witness DW/2 Sheikh Sadiq is related to accused/appellants. In cross-examination this witness has stated that he does not know under what circumstances late Jarina sustaining burns died. He also does not know that accused/appellants were demanding the golden ring and sofa set.
5. Where the death of a woman is caused by any burn or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within a period of 7 years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called dowry death and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
6. On the basis of evidence aforesaid, the ASJ in S.T. No. 662/95 rightly recorded conviction of accused/appellants under Sections 498A, 304B of IPC. The sentence of 3 years and 6 years R.I. respectively and payment of fine Rs. one thousand, three thousand in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months, 6 months cannot be said to be excessive.
7. Consequently, affirming the conviction-sentence vide impugned judgment in S.T. No. 662/95, appeal fails and is dismissed.