Raushan Bibi vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 4121 Jhar

                                    1    Criminal Appeal (DB) No.606 of 2023



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               Criminal Appeal (DB) No.606 of 2023

1. Raushan Bibi, aged about 46 years, W/o Kalam Ansari,
2. Kalam Ansari, aged about 51 years, son of Ismail Ansari
   Both residents of village- Garadih, P.O. & P.S. - Kairo, District-
   Lohardaga                       .....       Appellants
                         Versus
The State of Jharkhand             ....          Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

For the Appellants      :      Mr. Vishal Kr. Tiwary, Advocate
                               Mr. Manjeet Kr. Chaudhary, Advocate
For the Respondent      :      Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, APP
For the Informant       :      Mr. Swapan Maji, Advocate

                            -----

Order No.8: Dated 1st November 2023

I.A. No.3868 of 2023

The instant interlocutory application is filed under Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence, directed against the Judgment of Conviction dated 10.03.2023 and Order of sentence dated 13.03.2023, passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-III, Lohardaga, in S.T. Case No.64 of 2021, whereby and whereunder, both the appellants were convicted under Section 304B/34 of Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has submitted that it is a case where both the appellants happens to be the father-in-law and mother-in-law, have been falsely been implicated, since, they have not at all involved in demand of dowry or commission of crime of murder, so as to attract the ingredients of Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. He has substantiated his argument by referring to the testimony of PW-2, who is the mother of the deceased, PW-6-maternal uncle of the deceased and the investigating officer. Further submission has 2 Criminal Appeal (DB) No.606 of 2023

been made that the husband of the deceased, namely Gulshad Ansari on whose behalf the application has been filed for suspension of sentence, but the same has been dismissed as not pressed.

4. Mr. Vishal Kr. Tiwary, learned counsel appearing of the appellant based on the aforesaid premise has submitted that it is case where both the appellants deserve to be released from judicial custody after suspension of sentence in connection with Judgment of Conviction dated 10.03.2023 passed in S.T. Case No.64 of 2021.

5. While on the other hand, Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of suspension of sentence. Submission has been made by the learned counsel for the State that it is case where the prosecution has been able to prove the charge beyond all reasonable doubt, since, all the witnesses all along have supported the demand of dowry and the deceased was murdered in the matrimonial house. Hence the learned trial court after taking into consideration the testimony of witnesses and more particularly on the basis of the presumption that the death has occurred in the matrimonial house, has convicted the appellants, hence, it is not a case where the sentence is to be suspended.

6. Mr. Swapan Maji, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant has also seriously opposed the submission made on behalf of the appellants adopting the submission advanced on behalf of the learned counsel appearing for the State.

7. Both the learned counsel, appearing for the State and the Informant have submitted that it is not a case where the sentence is to be suspended.

8. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the findings recorded by the learned trial court in the impugned order as also the testimony and other materials available on Lower Court Record.

3 Criminal Appeal (DB) No.606 of 2023

9. It is a case where both the appellants, who happens to be mother-in-law and father-in-law of the appellant have been convicted under Section 304-B/34 of Indian Penal Code.

10. We are conscious about the ingredients of Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, i.e., "(i) The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under a normal circumstance.

(ii) Such a death should have occurred within seven years of her marriage.

(iii) She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband.

(iv)Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with demand of dowry.

(v) Such cruelty or harassment is shown to have been meted out to the woman soon before her death."

11. It is evident from the impugned order that the learned trial court taking into consideration the conditions available under Section 304-B of Indian Penal code has convicted both the appellants.

12. The question of applicability of the conditions available under Section 304-B of Indian Penal Code is to be taken into consideration based upon the material available on record, more particularly, the attributablity of the appellants herein, who are the father-in-law and mother-in-law.

13. It appears from the material available on record that the reference of solemnization of court marriage is there.

14. It further appears from the testimony of PW-2, the Mother, who has having no talking term with the deceased after the marriage and had not uttered a single word regarding the involvement of these two appellants for the demand of dowry and causing any kind of torture to that effect.

15. The PW-6, who happens to be the maternal uncle, had been sent by the father of the deceased immediately after knowing about the occurrence by the husband of the deceased through the mobile, who has been examined as PW-6, who has also not deposed about any 4 Criminal Appeal (DB) No.606 of 2023

demand of dowry as would appear from para-6 of the cross- examination.

16. This Court, in view of the fact that there is no specific overt act against both the appellants regarding the demand of dowry or having subjecting the deceased to any torture, rather it is upon the husband, both the appellants have been able to make out a prima facie case for suspension of sentence.

17. Accordingly, in consequence thereof, the appellants, named above, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-III, Lohardaga, in S.T. Case No.64 of 2021.

18. Accordingly, the instant I.A. No.3868 of 2023 stands disposed of.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

(Navneet Kumar, J.) R.Kumar