Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sital Sikari @ Shikary vs The State Of West Bengal on 10 March, 2021
10.03.2021
Item no.10
Ct. No.30
AKG
C.R.A. 469 of 2019
With
IA No. CRAN 1 OF 2019
Sital Sikari @ Shikary
Vs.
The State of West Bengal
Mr. Ujjal Ray
......for the Appellant.
Mr. Arijit Ganguly,
Mr. Avik Ghatak
......for the State.
The appellant has prayed for suspension of sentence of
bail under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The
appellant is the husband of the deceased victim. He has suffered
conviction for committing offence under Section 498A/304B.
It is ascertained from the submission made by the learned
Public Prosecutor-in-Charge that the marriage of the deceased
was solemnized with the petitioner on 12th February, 2014. She
had met with an unnatural death suffering burn injury on 26 th
July, 2014. Thus, she died within five months after her marriage.
From the evidence of PW4, who is the defacto complainant and
mother of the victim and PW5 who is the father of the deceased. It
is ascertained that the victim was subjected to torture on demand
of dowry.
Considering the gravity of offence and in view of the fact that
the case against the accused was held to be proved by the trial
court, the learned Public Prosecutor-in-Charge has raised an
objection against the prayer for bail. The learned advocate for the
accused/petitioner on the other hand submits that there is no
dispute on the question that the victim had met with an
unnatural death after receiving burn injury. It is submitted by
him that the victim might be set ablazed by her maternal
relations. Secondly, she might commit suicide by setting herself
on fire and thirdly, she might be accidental burn. The police
seized one kerosene lamp from the place of occurrence of accident
which prima facie suggests that the victim might be caught by fire
accidentally.
From the evidence of PW2, it is ascertained that the victim
was asked as to how she received burn injury. At this, the victim
replied that she did not set herself in fire. Therefore, the case of
committing suicide goes. If the accused persons set him in fire,
the charge ought to have been 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
However, the accused persons including the petitioner faced trial
in dowry death punishable under Section 304B of the Indian
Penal Code.
I have carefully perused the judgment of the certified copy of
the evidence. The evidence to the effect soon before her death, the
victim was tortured on demand of dowry is absent in the evidence.
Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. The
petitioner may find bail of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand
only) with two sureties each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bongaon with further
conditions that if on bail, he must visit the Officer-in-Charge of
the jurisdictional police station once in a month till the disposal of
the appeal and shall file an affidavit stating his residential
address and mobile phone number, if any, as well as epic card
number to the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned police station
on the first date of his visit in the police station. If the petitioner
violates any of the above conditions, the order of bail shall be
cancelled.
CRAN No. 1 of 2019 is accordingly disposed of.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)
