Ashok Sanyal vs The State Of West Bengal
2022 Latest Caselaw 188 Cal

Form No.J(1)

                         IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                             Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction
                                   Appellate Side
Present :

               The Hon'ble Justice Rabindranath Samanta


                              C.R.A. 235 of 1990


                          Ashok Sanyal              ....... Appellant.

                                    Versus

                         The State of West Bengal   ....... respondent.

For the State        :    Mr. Narayan Prasad Agarwala
                          Mr. Pratik Bose

Heard on             : 27.01.2022.

Judgment on          : 27th January, 2022.


Rabindranath Samanta, J:

None appears for the appellant despite service of administrative

notice.

The respondent State of West Bengal is represented by the

learned advocates Mr. Narayan Prasad Agarwala and Ms. Subhasree

Patal. Their appointment is regularised.

Learned lawyer appearing for the State respondent submits that

this Court may pass necessary order as the Court deems just after

going through the evidence on record.

This appeal has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved

by the judgment and the order of conviction and sentence passed by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Barasat, North 24-

Parganas, whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of the

offence punishable under Sections 304B/498A of the Indian Penal

Code and he was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment of 7 years.

By the judgment, the two other co-accused persons, namely Smt.

Pratiksha Sanyal and Miss Swati Sanyal alias Buri, the mother-in-law

and the sister-in-law of the deceased were acquitted of the charge.

To put briefly, the prosecution case may be stated as follows:-

Smt. Dipa Sanyal (nee Mukherjee), the youngest daughter of

P.W.2, Sib Chandra Mukherjee of village - Hatkhola Para, Santipur,

District - Nadia was given in marriage with the appellant Ashok Sanyal

on 4th December, 1984. At the time of her marriage, the father of Dipa

Sanyal gave bridal articles to the appellant and his family members.

After her marriage, the appellant demanded a cash of Rs.20,000/- from

the father of the deceased. Her father paid Rs.12,000/-, but he could

not pay the rest amount of Rs.8,000/-. Over non-payment of such

amount of money, the appellant and his family members subjected

Dipa to cruelty, both physically and mentally. Ultimately, unable to

bear with the torture, she ended her life on 25.06.1987.

On the allegations as above, an FIR was lodged on Bizpur Police

Station and on the basis of the FIR, Bizpur Police Station Case No.19

dated 25.06.1987 under Sections 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code

was registered against the accused persons for investigation.

After completion of the investigation, the I.O. submitted charge-

sheet against all the accused persons including the appellant under

Sections 306/498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code.

Charge under Sections 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code was

framed against the accused persons who pleaded not guilty to the

charge and claimed to be tried.

In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution examined as

many as 29 witnesses and a number of documents were admitted in

evidence.

On analysing the evidence on record, the learned Trial Judge

found the appellant, Ashok Sanyal guilty of commission of the offence

under the Sections 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code, but rest of the

accused persons, namely Smt. Pratiksha Sanyal and Miss Swati Sanyal

alias Buri were acquitted of the charge.

Now the question is whether the conviction and sentence

recorded by the learned Trial Judge is sustainable in law and on facts.

As it appears from the allegations in the FIR and the evidence of

P.W.2, Sib Chandra Mukherjee, the victim Smt. Dipa Sanyal (nee

Mukherjee) who was married on 4th December, 1984 breathed her last

on 25.06.1987. Therefore, she died within 7 years of her marriage. As

recorded by the learned Trial Judge, it appears that the concerned

prosecution witnesses have unequivocally deposed before the Court

that before her death, the deceased Dipa Sanyal was subjected to

cruelty, both physically and mentally on the demand for dowry.

Despite several opportunities given to the appellant, he did not

turn up before the Court to point out either through his lawyer or

himself what are the deficiency or weakness of the evidence of the

prosecution witnesses by which the credibility of the evidence gets

shaken.

However, as the appellant is not represented by anybody, this

Court scrutinized and assessed the evidence of the prosecution

witnesses with care and circumspection.

As the evidence on record shows, I do not find any justification to

depart from the findings as recorded by the learned Trial Judge.

Therefore, I concur with the conviction as imposed by the learned

Trial Judge upon the appellant.

According to Section 304B, whoever commits dowry death shall

be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall be less than 7

years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life.

It is the fact that the appellant has gone through the mental

pains and agony since 1987 for continuing criminal proceedings and

thereafter the instant appeal is continuing for more than 34 years. But

as the legislature has prescribed the minimum punishment for 7 years

for the aforesaid offence, the hands of the Court are tied to reduce the

sentence to any other extent.

Accordingly, the sentence as imposed by the learned Trial Judge

sustains. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed.

The judgment and the order of conviction and sentence passed by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Barasat, North 24-

Parganas in Sessions Trial No.1(1) of 1990 arising out of Sessions Case

No.24(8) of 1989 is hereby confirmed.

The appellant, Ashok Sanyal is directed to surrender before the

learned Court below forthwith to serve out the remaining part of the

sentence, if any. If he fails to surrender before the court of the learned

Trial Judge, the learned Trial Judge is at liberty to issue non-bailable

warrant of arrest so that the appellant serves out the remaining part of

the sentence.

Send down the L.C.R. along with the copy of the judgment to the

learned court below for information and compliance.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be

supplied expeditiously after complying with all necessary legal

formalities.

(Rabindranath Samanta, J.) pp.