Balo Mahto And Ors vs State Of Bihar Now Jharkhand on 26 April 2006 in Marathi

Jharkhand High Court

Balo Mahto And Ors. vs State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) on 26 April, 2006

Equivalent citations: 2007 CriLJ 659

Bench: N Dhinakar, R Prasad

JUDGMENT

1. Balo Mahato, Daso Mahato and Khari Mahtwain, who are the appellants in the above appeal, were arrayed as A3, A1 and A2, in that order, before, the Addl. Sessions Judge II, Deoghar. They were charged and tried under Sections 304-B and 201, I.P.C with the aid of Section 34, I.P.C. The allegation against the appellants, who, in the judgment, will be referred as A1 to A3 in the same order as they were arrayed before the Sessions Judge, is that they, in furtherance of the common intention of each other and sharing the common intention of Chandrika Devi and Biranchi Mahton, who were arrayed as A4 and A5, subjected Murli Devi to cruelty, as a result of which she died otherwise than under normal circumstances and later threw the dead body at a crematorium ground in order to screen the offence. Learned Trial Judge, while acquitting Chandrika Devi and Biranchi Mahto of the charges, found the appellants guilty and sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life under section 304-B read with section 34, I.P.C and also sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 201 read with Section 34, I.P.C with a direction that the sentences of imprisonment will run concurrently. The present appeal is against the aforesaid conviction and sentence.

2. Murli Devi is the daughter of P.W. 9, Anup Mahto. She was given in marriage to A3 Balo Mahto about five years before the date of occurrence. Daso Mahto and Khari Mah twain are the parents of A3. After the marriage, the deceased Murli Devi was living with her husband and in-laws in village Jara and a daughter was born. On the date of incident, according to the prosecution, the child was 10 to 11 days old. The further case of the prosecution is that while the deceased was living with her husband and in-laws, she was not properly treated as she was not provided with clothes and other essential requirements. The further allegation is that A1 to A3 were asking the deceased to bring Cycle and Ox as dowry from her parents and when she did not bring those materials, she was badly beaten by the accused. On 18-5-1988, Mahru Mahto, P.W. 6, brother of P.W. 9 Anup Mahto, was proceeding to village - Bhari. On way to village - Bhari, he visited the house of Murli Devi, the deceased in the case. Murli Devi informed P.W. 6 that she is being ill-treated by her husband and in-laws for not bringing the articles required by him and his parents. She requested P.W. 6 to ask her father to meet her. On 19-5-1988, P.W. 9 Anup Mahto, on getting information about the ill-treatment of the deceased by her in-law, went to the house of the deceased and questioned Balo Mahto A3 and Daso Mahto A1 as to the whereabouts of his daughter Murli Devi as she was not in the house. Thereupon, it is further case of the prosecution, that both of them told P.W. 9 that she has left the house on the previous evening and could not be traced. A Panchayati was convened and at the Panchayat, it was decided that the accused should produce her within ten days and that if the girl is not produced, P.W. 9 can take any legal steps against the accused. P.W. 9 started searching for his daughter but could not succeed in tracing her. On 24-5-1988, he received an information that an unclaimed body is found at a Burning Ghat. He went there along with the villagers where he found the dead body and he identified the dead body to be the body of his daughter from the Tato mark and from the other articles lying near it. He went to the police station and gave fardbeyan, Ext. 2, on 25-5-1988, on the basis of which a crime was registered and investigation was taken up by P.W. 11 Shiv Kumar Ratan. Inquest was conducted and later the dead body was sent to the hospital for post mortem.

3. On receipt of the requisition, P.W. 10 Dr. Kameshwar Prasad conducted autopsy on the dead body of Murli Devi and found the following injuries:

(1) Abrasion on the back of right elbow 2" × 1"

(2) Bruise on the front and middle of left side of chest 3" × 1"

(3) Bruise on the back of left forearm 21/2 × 1"

(4) Bruise on the front of neck horizontal about middle 3" × 1/2".

On internal examination, the Doctor found fracture of seventh rib and on opening skull and neck, the Doctor noticed bruise with white margins. The dead body was found congested. He did not notice any fracture of thyroid or hyoid bone. Trachea was found to be soft and decomposed. The Doctor issued Ext. 1, the post mortem certificate, with his opinion that death is on account of asphyxia due to throttling.