Jharkhand High Court
Vikash Kumar Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 29 October, 2024
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Subhash Chand
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 617 of 2024
1.Vikash Kumar Mahto, aged about 28 years son of Bhuvan Mahto,
Resident of village-Chitami, Tola Bhandardih, Pindrajora, P.O. & P.S.
Pindrajora District Bokaro.
2. Bhuwan Mahto, aged about 65 years son of Mahanand Mahto,
Resident of Village-Chitami, Tola Bhandardih, Pindrajora, P.O. & P.S.
Pindrajora District Bokaro
........... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .......Respondent.
-------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
-------
For the Appellants : Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P.
----------------------------
th
07/Dated: 29 October, 2024
1. The present interlocutory application has been filed by the appellants
for suspension of sentence dated 16th February, 2024 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-IV-cum-Special Judge (Crime Against Women),
Bokaro in connection with Sessions Trial Case No.299 of 2023 arising out of
Pindrajora P.S. Case No.77 of 2023, whereby and whereunder the appellants
have been convicted for the offence under Section 304-B/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
20 years.
2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellants that it is a case
where there is no evidence attracting the ingredients of Section 304-B of the
IPC. Such submission has been made on the basis of the fact that it is a case
of suicide and no evidence has been traced out showing therein that there is
any involvement of the appellants in commission of the crime, so as to
attract the offence under Section 304-B of the IPC. Further submission has
been made that no demand of dowry is said to be proved, if the testimony of
the prosecution witnesses will be taken into consideration in entirety.
Learned counsel for the appellant based on the aforesaid ground has
submitted that it is a fit case for suspension of sentence.
3. While, on the other hand, Mr. Saket Kumar, learned A.P.P. appearing
for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence. It
has been contended that the judgment of conviction is based upon the
parameter as fixed under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act because
the death of deceased was caused within four corners of the matrimonial
house. It has further been contended that there is no defence on behalf of
the appellants showing the cause of death as to why the deceased hanged
herself in her matrimonial house. It has also been submitted that the Doctor
(the P.W.-4), who conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body
of the deceased has found swelling overall left side of the cervical region
which has been found to be ante mortem in nature. The doctor has also
found trachea and larynx to be normal. The cause of death has been shown
to be spinal injury. Learned A.P.P. based upon the aforesaid ground has
submitted that it is not a fit case where the sentence can be suspended.
4. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the finding recorded by the learned trial court in the impugned order
as also the testimony of the witnesses available in the trial court record along
with exhibits, particularly the postmortem report of the deceased.
5. It is evident from the impugned judgment that all the prosecution
witnesses including the Investigating Officer has deposed that the place of
death of the deceased was caused within four corners of the matrimonial
house. The learned trial court in view of the aforesaid admitted position has
applied the principle as referred under provision of Section 113-B of the
Indian Evidence Act.
6. It is also evident from the testimony of the prosecution witnesses that
the demand of dowry has also been substantiated. Further when the
prosecution witnesses have reached the matrimonial house of the deceased,
the dead body of the deceased was lying on floor. The Doctor (P.W.-4) who
has conducted the postmortem has found swelling overall left side of the
cervical region which has been found to be ante mortem in nature. The
doctor has also found trachea and larynx to be normal. Further the cause of
death has been shown to be spinal injury. Since, the trachea and larynx were
found to be normal, it has been contended by learned counsel for the
appellant that it is a case of hanging. The said contention of the learned
counsel for the appellant cannot be said to be correct.
7. Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court is of the view that it is not a
fit case, where the sentence is to be suspended.
8. Accordingly, the I.A. No.4821 of 2024 stands dismissed.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Rohit Pandey/-
