Patna High Court
Laxmi Kant Pandey vs The State Of Bihar on 1 August, 2024
Author: Shailendra Singh
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Shailendra Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.18 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2018 Thana- BADHAILA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Ramesh Pandey, Son of Late Harihar Pandey, Resident of Village- Maghiwan,
P.S.- Baghila, District- Rohtas.
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 54 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2018 Thana- BADHAILA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Laxmi Kant Pandey, S/O Ramesh Pandey, R/O Village- Maghiwan, P.S.-
Baghila, District- Rohtas
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 18 of 2021)
For the Appellant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, Addl. PP
For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kr. Pandey, Advocate
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 54 of 2021)
For the Appellant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, Addl. PP
For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kr. Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH)
Date : 01-08-2024
Both the appeals have arisen out of the same
judgment, so they are being decided together by a common
judgment.
2. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
2/23
assisted by Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the
appellants, Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Arvind Kr. Pandey, learned
counsel for the informant.
3. The appeals have been filed against the judgment of
conviction dated 10.07.2020 and order of sentence dated
13.07.2020
passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions
Judge-XIII, Rohtas at Sasaram, in Sessions Trial Case No. 180
of 2019 arising out of Baghaila P.S. Case No. 60 of 2018,
whereby and whereunder both the appellants have been
convicted for the offence under Section 304B read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and both of them
have been ordered to suffer imprisonment for life for the offence
punishable under Section 304B of IPC.
Prosecution Story:-
4. The substance of the prosecution story is as
follows:-
As per the informant, who happens to be father of the
deceased, he married his daughter namely, Suman Kumari
Pandey, to the appellant Laxmi Kant Pandey on 11.05.2018 and
whenever, he and his family members visited sasuraal of the
deceased, the accused/appellants demanded two lacs rupees, a
gold chain, stabilizer, an inverter and Dish TV etc. from them
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
and his daughter was being tortured by them in respect of these
demands and on 09.08.2018, when he went to sasuraal of his
daughter on the occasion of Teez festival then the appellants and
other accused, who are in-laws of the deceased, picked up an
argument with him in the context of their dowry demands and
then the appellant Laxmi Kant Pandey, his agnate, namely,
Birendra Pandey and his wife Guriya Devi and some others
arrived there and all of them threatened him to face dire
consequences and asked him to fulfill their demands at the
earliest and also asked him to transfer the ownership of a vehicle
in the name of the appellant Laxmi Kant Pandey and further,
threatened that it would not be in the interest of his daughter if
their demand of gold chain was not fulfilled. After hearing this,
he returned back and on the very next day i.e. 10.08.2018, he
received a message on his mobile phone number sent by his
daughter by using her mobile phone revealing that her mother-
in-law had created a tension in her matrimonial house on
account of the demand of a Saree and she had been restrained
from talking to her parental family members and her father-in-
law said that from now, her brother had to search an another
man to marry her and also said that her father would have to
come with ten persons and from them, he would get a written
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
and signed paper before allowing her to return back to her
parental house. The informant further alleged that the message
was sent at 9:35 A.M. but he saw the message at 1:00 P.M. and
thereafter, he rushed to Majhiaawn village (sasural of the
deceased) and found his daughter lying in the Courtyard
(Aangan) in burnt condition and thereafter, he and his son went
to the police station and submitted an application (Exhibit-1) for
lodging the FIR.
5. With the above allegations, the informant filed a
written FIR (Exhibit-1) at Baghaila police station, on that basis, the
formal FIR bearing Baghaila P.S. Case No. 60 of 2018 was
registered under Section 304B read with Section 34 of IPC against
the accused which set the criminal law in motion.
6. After the completion of the investigation, the police
submitted chargesheet against the appellants and the investigation
was kept pending against the rest accused, thereafter, the
cognizance of the alleged offence was taken by the learned
Magistrate and then, the case of the appellants was committed to
the Court of Sessions for trial.
7. The Appellants stood charged for the offence
punishable under Section 304B read with Section 34 of IPC and the
same was explained to them in hindi to which they denied and
claimed to be tried for the said offence.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
8. During the trial, the prosecution examined altogether
7 witnesses who are as under :-
P.W. 1 Ajay Kumar Pandey Victim's elder brother
P.W. 2 Mithilesh Kumar Pandey Victim's younger brother
P.W. 3 Dhiraj Kumar Chaubey Victim's cousin (Phuphera) brother
P.W. 4 Dr. Sri. Bhagwan Singh Doctor
P.W. 5 Sunil Pandey Victim's uncle
P.W. 6 Nand Bihari Pandey Informant-victim's father
P.W. 7 Anil Kumar Pandey The Investigating Officer
9. In documentary evidence, the prosecution proved the
following documents and got them marked as exhibits which are as
under : -
Ext. 1 The written report
Ext. 1/1 Signature of one Nand Bihari Pandey(informant) on written
report
Ext. 2 Signature of one Mithilesh Kumar Pandey on the inquest
report
Ext. 2/1 Signature of Nand Bihari Pandey (informant) on the
inquest report
Ext. 3 & 3/1 Signature on the seizure list
Ext. 4 & 4/1 Signature of one Anil Kumar Pandey on the formal FIR
Ext. 5 Formal FIR
10. The prosecution also produced one article/object
which was marked as 'Material Exhibit -1'.
11. After the completion of the prosecution evidence, the
statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 of
Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') in which they
denied the main circumstance appearing against them from the
prosecution's evidences but they did not take any specific defence
in their statements.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
12. In defence evidence, the appellants examined 2
persons who are as under : -
D.W. 1 Santosh Kumar Rai
D.W. 2 Smt. Mamta devi
Submissions on behalf of the appellants : -
13. Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel
appearing for the appellants submits that neither the appellants
nor their family members demanded any dowry from the
deceased, in fact, the informant's daughter (deceased) was not
happy at her sasuraal and also she was a short tempered lady
and one day prior to the alleged occurrence, the informant went
to the sasuraal of the deceased on the occasion of Teej festival
with some gifts. Thereafter, some hot discussions took place in
between the informant and his daughter and the next day, the
informant's daughter committed suicide by setting herself ablaze
and at that time, any member of her in-laws' family was not
present there and in this regard, the evidence of two defence
witnesses D.W.-1 and D.W.-2 is very relevant. It is further
submitted that the alleged text message, which is said to have
been sent by the deceased to her father's mobile phone number
on the day of occurrence some hours before the commission of
the alleged occurrence, does not show that the appellants had
been torturing the deceased for the demand of Rs. 2,00,000/- and
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
household articles as alleged in the FIR and she simply revealed
some domestic issues in that message which are not sufficient to
draw the inference that the appellants had been torturing her
regularly for their alleged demands. There is sufficient evidence
to form an opinion of innocence of the appellants in the alleged
occurrence. Though against the appellants there is one
circumstance as to unnatural death of the deceased in their house
but it is a settled principle of law that where two views are
possible from the evidences then the view which is in favour of
the accused and shows his/her innocence, must be adopted by
the Court of law.
14. Learned counsel further submits that all the
witnesses produced by the prosecution are family members of
the informant and not a single person belonging to the vicinity
of the place of occurrence was produced and examined and in
the inquest report and postmortem report, there is no details of
the FIR No. which shows that these documents had been
prepared before the registration of the FIR and the same is
sufficient to prove the FIR being an ante-dated document and
further the delay of three days took place on the part of the
Investigating Officer in sending the FIR to the court of
Magistrate which also makes the prosecution's allegation highly
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
suspicious. In support of this submission, learned counsel has
placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court
passed in the case of Meharaj Singh (L/Nk.) vs. State of U.P.
with analogous Cr. Appeal No. 288/1994 titled as Kalu vs. State
of U.P. and Others reported in (1994) 5 SCC 188.
Submissions on behalf of the prosecution : -
15. On the contrary, Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey,
learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that the
deceased died within three months of her marriage by sustaining
serious burn injuries and since the time of her marriage, she was
being subjected to dowry demand by the appellants and their
family members and in this regard, the evidence of P.W.-1,
P.W.-2, P.W.-3, P.W.-5 and P.W.-6 is relevant and their evidence
has fully established the allegation that the appellants had not
been permitting the deceased to return back to her parental
house since the time of her marriage till her death on account of
non-fulfillment of their dowry demand and there is sufficient
evidence to prove that the deceased was subjected to physical
cruelty by the appellants by causing burn injuries to her soon
before her death, so, the prosecution is entitled to get the benefit
of presumption under section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act.
16. Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, learned Additional Public
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
Prosecutor appearing for the State adopts the above submissions
made by the informant's counsel.
Consideration and Analysis : -
17. Heard both the sides, perused the evidences
available on the case record of the trial court and also gone
through the statements of the accused/appellants recorded by
them under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in
short 'Cr.P.C.').
18. The present matter relates to dowry death and as
per the allegation, the victim, who happened to be daughter of
the informant, died within three months of her marriage by
sustaining severe burn injuries and her burnt body was found in
the house of the appellants. The informant alleged that Laxmi
Kant Pandey, husband of the deceased (appellant in Cr. App
(DB) No. 54 of 2021) and Ramesh Pandey, father-in-law of the
deceased (appellant in Cr. App (DB) No. 18 of 2021), had been
torturing the deceased/victim for the demand of Rs. 2,00,000/-
(Rupees two lacs), a gold chain, stabilizer, an inverter and Dish
TV and they were not permitting the victim to visit her parental
house and on 09.08.2018, the father of the deceased (informant)
went to Majhiaawn village (मझझआआ व) which is sasuraal of the
deceased on account of Teej festival and on that occasion also,
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
the appellants and their other family members again made their
demand of the alleged articles and threatened the informant to
face dire consequences if their demand was not fulfilled. On
next day (i.e. 10.08.2018) the deceased sent a message to the
informant on his mobile phone giving the information that her
mother-in-law had created a discord (कलह) in the house on
account of a saree demand and she had been restrained by her
in-laws from talking with her parental family members and they
said to her that from now her brother would have to search an
another man for her remarriage and she would be permitted to
return back at her parents' house only when her father would
bring 10 persons with him and make a paper with their
signatures.
19. On the other hand, the main defence taken by the
appellants is that the deceased was a beautiful and educated lady
while her husband was not as educated as she was, so, the
deceased was not satisfied with her husband and finally, she
committed suicide by pouring kerosene oil over her body and
setting herself on fire.
20. The first and foremost contention raised by the
appellants' counsel is that as per the formal FIR and the
evidence of the Investigating Officer, who was examined as
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
P.W.-7, the FIR was registered on 10.08.2018 at 14:10 hrs and
the investigation was started on the same day at 14:35 hrs but in
the inquest report as well as in the postmortem report, there is no
details of the FIR No. while the inquest report was also prepared
on 10.08.2018 at 15:20 hrs and the postmortem examination was
done on the same day at 23:00 hrs, so, not disclosing the FIR
No. shows that the FIR was registered after preparation of the
inquest report and postmortem report of the deceased. In this
regard, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to
the statement of the Investigating Officer (P.W.-7) made by him
in his cross-examination. We find substance in the said
contention as P.W.-7 (I.O.) stated in his cross-examination that
the FIR was registered on 10.08.2018 at 14:10 hrs and the police
station is situated 6 kilometers away from the place of
occurrence and he started the investigation on the same day at
14:35 hrs after registering the FIR. He further stated that the FIR
was sent to the court on 13.08.2018.
21. Here, it is important to mention that the
Investigating Officer (P.W.-7) was the then Station House
Officer (in short 'SHO') of the concerned police station and he
himself started the investigation into the alleged incident. As
P.W.-7 was the senior-most police officer in the Baghaila police
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
station, so from him, it could not be expected to leave the
relevant columns of the inquest report and postmortem report
blank in which the FIR No. of the case was required to be
mentioned and if the FIR had been registered before preparation
of the said documents then it appears that the SHO intentionally
left the relevant columns of both the documents blank with an
ulterior motive and the same lead us to form an opinion that the
inquest report was prepared immediately after the occurrence
and the postmortem examination was also done on the same day
of occurrence and only thereafter, the FIR was registered after
thought as the same was sent to the concerned Magistrate after
three days i.e. on 13.08.2018, from its registration.
22. On this aspect of the matter, the observation of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court made in the case of Mehraj Singh
(supra) is being reproduced as under : -
" 12. ..............With a view to determine whether
the FIR was lodged at the time it is alleged to have
been recorded, the courts generally look for certain
external checks. One of the checks is the receipt of
the copy of the FIR, called a special report in a
murder case, by the local Magistrate. If this report
is received by the Magistrate late it can give rise to
an inference that the FIR was not lodged at the
time it is alleged to have been recorded, unless, of
course the prosecution can offer a satisfactory
explanation for the delay in despatching or receipt
of the copy of the FIR by the local Magistrate. The
second external check equally important is the
sending of the copy of the FIR along with the dead
body and its reference in the inquest report. Even
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
though the inquest report, prepared under Section
174 CrPC, is aimed at serving a statutory function,
to lend credence to the prosecution case, the details
of the FIR and the gist of statements recorded
during inquest proceedings get reflected in the
report. The absence of those details is indicative of
the fact that the prosecution story was still in an
embryo state and had not been given any shape and
that the FIR came to be recorded later on after due
deliberations and consultations and was then ante-
timed to give it the colour of a promptly lodged
FIR."
23. Here, it is important to mention that the informant
(P.W.-6) has got education up to matriculation and as per P.W.-6,
he and his son Mithilesh Kumar Pandey went to the police
station to lodge the FIR and he got the FIR written by his son.
The informant and his son Mithilesh Kumar Pandey both are
educated up to 10th and 12th standard respectively but the
circumstance why the informant got his FIR written by his son
despite he himself being an educated person, has not been
explained.
24. As per the prosecution story, the informant, his
sons and other relatives went to the matrimonial house of the
deceased 4-5 times for bringing the deceased back to her
parental house but on every occasion, the appellants and their
family members did not permit her to go with them. The
allegation shows that the accused/appellants had been torturing
the deceased since the time of her marriage and she was not
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
being permitted to return back to her parents' house (maika)
despite four to five times requests having been made by her
father, brothers and her relatives. P.W.-1, brother of the
deceased, stated in his cross-examination that the appellants' act
as to not allowing the deceased to go back to her parental home
on several occasions, was not informed to anyone and in this
regard, no panchayat meeting was held in Majhiaawn village.
From this evidence, it appears that the prosecution party
remained silent despite the appellants' constant conduct of not
permitting the deceased to return back to her parental house and
the same creates a doubt in the prosecution's story.
25. As per the evidence of P.W.-1 and P.W.-2, who
happen to be brothers of the deceased, the accused/appellants
forcefully kept the motorcycle of P.W.-1 when he went to the
sasuraal of the deceased and thereafter the accused/appellants
made pressure upon him to transfer the ownership of the said
motorcycle in the name of appellant Laxmi Kant. So in view of
the allegation, the snatched motorcycle ought to be in the
possession of the appellants when the alleged occurrence took
place but in this regard, there is no material or any evidence and
even the evidence of the Investigating Officer does not reveal
any fact to support the allegation as to the motorcycle of P.W.-1
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
being in the possession of the accused when the police party
inspected the place of occurrence.
26. The prosecution has placed reliance upon the text
message which is said to have been sent by the deceased on the
day of occurrence by using her own mobile phone number to the
mobile phone number of the informant and the witnesses of the
prosecution also highlighted the said messages in their evidence.
In this regard, the evidence of P.W.-6 and P.W.-7 is relevant.
27. P.W.-6/informant stated in his cross-examination
that he gave his mobile phone to the SHO and showed him the
victim's message and also gave the message in printed form to
the SHO. While the Investigating Officer (P.W.-7) deposed in
his cross-examination that he did not find any mobile phone of
the informant and the deceased, hence, he did not seize the
same. So, reliance can not be placed on the electronic message
which is said to have been sent by the deceased on the day of
occurrence to the mobile phone of the informant rather on the
other hand, the contradiction in between the evidence of the
Investigating Officer and the informant regarding the said text
message creates a serious doubt in the prosecution's allegation.
28. It came in the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses that the deceased was a graduate and beautiful lady
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
while her husband Laxmi Kant Pandey was not having much
education in comparison to the education of his wife and his
livelihood was depending on traditional religious works as well
as agriculture during the relevant period. Though a gap in the
educational qualification in between the spouses cannot always
be a ground for committing suicide in every matter but in some
cases, where the spouses have rural background, such gap may
cause frustration to one or both the spouses leading him/her to
commit suicide and the said circumstance is in favour of the
accused/appellants.
29. As per the evidence of the Investigating Officer
(P.W.-7) who inspected the place of occurrence, the dead body
of the deceased was found in burnt condition in her sasuraal's
house near her room's gate and the household articles including
pillows, bedsheet, curtains, etc. were found in burnt condition
and a five litre almost empty container having about 50 ml
kerosene oil was also found in the room and as per the FIR, the
informant reached at the sasuraal of the deceased within one
hour after seeing the message sent by his daughter on his mobile
phone and when he reached at the sasuraal of the deceased, he
did not find any family member of the in-laws of the deceased
and only find the dead body of the deceased in burnt condition.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
30. The defence witness D.W.-2 stated that she used to
visit the house of the appellants and on the day of occurrence,
she visited the appellants' house to take money from them but at
that time, she did not find anyone in their house and some ladies
told her that the wife of Laxmi Kant Pandey (appellant) had
committed suicide. The evidence of this witness as well as the
informant suggests that the appellants or any member of their
family were not present in the house when the deceased
sustained burnt injuries and the said circumstance as well as
burning of curtains, bedsheet, pillows and other articles in the
bedroom of the deceased suggests that the deceased might have
committed suicide.
31. Section 113-B of the Evidence Act raises a
presumption as to dowry death. Section 113B reads as under:-
"[113-B. Presumption as to dowry 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.
Explanation. For the purposes of this section,
"dowry death", shall have the same meaning as in
section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of
1860).]"
Section 304 B IPC is reproduced hereunder:-
"[304B. Dowry death.
(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than
under normal circumstances within seven 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.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section,
"dowry" shall have the same meaning as in section
2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
(2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be
punished with imprisonment for a term which shall
not be less than seven years but which may extend
to imprisonment for life.]"
32. In the case of Kunhiabdulla v. State of Kerala
reported in AIR 2004 SC 1731 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
observed in paragraph '11' as under:-
"11. A conjoint reading of Section 113-B of the
Evidence Act and Section 304-B IPC shows that
there must be material to show that soon before
her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or
harassment. Prosecution has to rule out the
possibility of a natural or accidental death so as to
bring it within the purview of "death occurring
otherwise than in normal circumstances". The
expression "soon before" is very relevant where
Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section
304-B IPC are pressed into service. The
prosecution is obliged to show that soon before
the occurrence there was cruelty or harassment
and only in that case the presumption operates.
Evidence in that regard has to be led by the
prosecution. "Soon before" is a relative term and
it would depend upon circumstances of each case
and no straitjacket formula can be laid down as to
what would constitute a period of soon before the
occurrence. It would be hazardous to indicate any
fixed period, and that brings in the importance of
a proximity test both for the proof of an offence
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
of dowry death as well as for raising a
presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence
Act. The expression "soon before her death" used
in the substantive Section 304-B IPC and Section
113-B of the Evidence Act is present with the idea
of proximity test. No definite period has been
indicated and the expression "soon before" is not
defined. A reference to the expression "soon
before" used in Section 114 Illustration (a) of the
Evidence Act is relevant. It lays down that a court
may presume that a man who is in the possession
of goods "soon after the theft", is either the thief,
or has received the goods knowing them to be
stolen, unless he can account for its possession.
The determination of the period which can come
within the term "soon before" is left to be
determined by the courts, depending upon facts
and circumstances of each case. Suffice, however,
to indicate that the expression "soon before"
would normally imply that the interval should not
be much between the cruelty or harassment
concerned and the death in question. There must
be existence of a proximate and live link between
the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and
the death concerned. If alleged incident of cruelty
is remote in time and has become stale enough
not to disturb the mental equilibrium of the
woman concerned, it would be of no
consequence."
33. So far as the presumption under Section 113B of
the Indian Evidence Act is concerned, though in the present
matter the informant's daughter died an unnatural death by
sustaining burn injuries within 7 years of her marriage but in
view of the above discussed facts and circumstances coming out
of prosecution evidences, this Court finds no cogent material to
form the opinion that the deceased was subjected to cruelty in
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
the form of burn injuries by the appellants themselves soon
before her death, so, on account of lacking of this main
ingredient, the prosecution is not entitled to get the benefit of
presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act.
34. It is a settled principle of law that if two views are
available in the light of the evidences, one pointing to the guilt
of the accused and other towards his/her innocence then the
view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted, as
the paramount consideration of the court is to ensure that
miscarriage of justice should be prevented and a miscarriage of
justice arising from the acquittal of the guilty is no less than the
conviction of an innocent. In this regard, the observation made
by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan vs.
Raja Ram reported in (2003) 8 SCC 180 is important and the
same is being reproduced as under : -
" 7. .......The golden thread which runs through
the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that
if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the
case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to
his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused
should be adopted. The paramount consideration of the
Court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented. A
miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the
guilty is no less than from the conviction of an
innocent......."
35. And further in view of the principles laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Meharaj Singh (L/Nk.)
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
(supra), the delay in sending the FIR to the Magistrate and
absence of FIR No. in the inquest report and postmortem report
also gives rise to the inference that the FIR of the instant matter
was prepared later on with an afterthought.
Conclusion : -
36. After having discussed the evidences of both the
sides available on the case record of the trial court, we find that
there are some strong circumstances going against the prosecution.
Firstly, an electronic massage which is said to have been sent by
the deceased herself just some hours before the commission of the
occurrence, was not brought on record by way of electronic
evidence, secondly, the ocular evidence shows that there is some
educational qualification gap in between the deceased and her
husband which might have led the deceased to commit suicide and
thirdly, the non-mentioning of the FIR number in the inquest
report and postmortem report despite the FIR having been
registered prior to the preparation of these reports as claimed by
the prosecution coupled with the three days' delay in sending the
FIR to the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate and fourthly, the
absence of the accused/appellants in the house during the relevant
time when the deceased got burn injuries. These circumstances are
persuading us to form an opinion of innocence in favour of the
appellants. The evidence led on behalf of the prosecution, though,
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
are showing some circumstances against the appellants such as
that the appellants were not allowing the deceased to go back her
parental house and that she had sustained serious burn injuries
within three months of her marriage, the prosecution is unable to
prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her
death due to non-fulfilment of the demand of dowry.
37. It is a settled principle of law that if two views are
possible from the evidences, one pointing to the guilt of the
accused and other towards his/her innocence then the view which
is favorable to the accused should be adopted as the paramount
consideration of the court of law must be to prevent the
miscarriage of justice. Accordingly, we find that in the instant
matter, the appellants are entitled to get the benefit of doubt and
we find it appropriate to make our opinion of the innocence of the
appellants in the alleged crime as the same would serve the
justice. As such, the judgment and order impugned convicting and
sentencing the appellants for the charged offence are set aside and
the appellants are hereby acquitted of the offence for which they
were charged and held guilty by the learned trial court. In the
result, these appeals stand allowed.
38. The appellants are in jail, hence, they are directed to
be released henceforth, if their custody is not required in other
case.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.18 of 2021 dt.01-08-2024
39. Let the judgment's copy be sent immediately to the
trial court as well as the jail authority concerned for information
and needful compliance.
40. Let the LCR be sent back to the trial court
concerned forthwith.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Shailendra Singh, J)
annu/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 23.08.2024
Transmission Date 23.08.2024
