RANCHI, India, Oct. 21 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Sept. 22:

1. Both the appeals arising out of common judgement, hence heard together and are being disposed of by common judgment.

2. Originally Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.845 of 2003 was preferred by 8 appellants, out of them, appellant No.1, Tejo Das and appellant No.2, Radhika Devi have died and their appeal have been abated vide order dated 30.07.2025. The names of surviving appellants, namely, Prasadi Das, Karu Das, Arjun Das, Sabita Devi, Urmila Devi and Parwati Devi have been renumbered and the appeal is heard on behalf of the aforesaid alive appellants along with appeal of Chhote Lal Das, who has preferred Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1138 of 2003.

3. Above appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction dated 19.06.2003 and order of sentence dated 20.06.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Deoghar in S.C. No.6 of 2001/210 of 2002 arising out of Sarwan P.S. Case No.54 of 2000, whereby and whereunder the appellants have been held guilty for the offences under sections 304 B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under section 304 B read with section 34 of IPC.

4. We have already heard the arguments of Mr. Anand Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, learned A.P.P. for the State.

Factual Matrix:-

5. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal in narrow campus is that the informant's sister, Chinta Devi (since deceased) was married with Chottelal Das (appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1138 of 2003) in the year 1995. It is alleged that after marriage, when the informant's sister went to her sasural, she was being ill-treated and tortured at the hands of her husband, in-laws along with other family members in connection with demand of dowry. Although, the informant, Narsingh Das had given dowry as per his capacity but the accused persons were demanding additional dowry in the shape of T.V. and golden ring. Due to non-fulfillment of the same, the informant's sister was subjected to torture and harassment and she was not provided even proper food and drink. It is further alleged that once the informant's sister was sent to her parental home with direction that unless T.V. or cash is given, he will not get Bidai of the informant's sister.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=WSRFLpK7bpll%2Fzvq9H5YQi5r4FaSjtr1z33C0bndEG7qHOg6X3Uu%2B157MVfkUF%2Bo&caseno=Cr.A(DB)/1138/2003&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010010362003&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.