RANCHI, India, Aug. 2 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on July 1:

1. Heard Mr. Shekhar Prasad Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, learned APP.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 19.01.2004 passed by Sri Gautam Kumar Choudhary, learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 182 of 1999, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default in payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for 7 days.

3. The prosecution case arises out of the fardbeyan of Lalan Rajwar recorded on 30.10.1998 in which it has been stated that the marriage of the sister of the informant, namely, Lalita Devi was solemnized three years back with Santosh Rajwar (Appellant). The sister of the informant remained at her matrimonial house for one year after which on the pretext that she was deaf, was ousted from her matrimonial house. After her ouster, she started residing in the house of the informant. A Panchayati was held and pressure was mounted upon Santosh Rajwar to keep his wife with him, but he refused.

The sister of the informant was staying in the house of the informant for the last two years and during this period, Santosh Rajwar had never come to meet her. However, from the time of Durga Puja Santosh Rajwar had started frequenting the house of the informant. It has been alleged that on 29.10.1998 Santosh Rajwar had come to the house of the informant at 12 noon and remained with the sister of the informant for three hours. When the sister of the informant expressed her intention to bring oil from the market for her father, Santosh Rajwar also went with her to the market. At around 5 p.m., the sister of the informant returned back with faltering steps and started shouting for help. When she came inside the house, she disclosed that Santosh Rajwar has administered poison upon her. After sometime, the sister of the informant started vomiting and foam also started coming out from her mouth. The informant and the others were trying to call a Doctor, but in the meantime she died.

4. The prosecution has examined as many as fourteen (14) witnesses in support of its case.

P.W. 1-Gendo Rajwar has stated that at the time of the incident, he was in his house. He has stated that Santosh Rajwar and Lalita Devi had gone to the market and when Lalita Devi returned back, she started shouting and disclosed that Santosh had administered poison upon her. He helped her on the cot and went to call a Doctor. The Doctor came and found her dead. He has proved the inquest report which has been marked as Ext. 1 with objection.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=94g2mG%2B4Dkj9qDi7aqGKGfkfIAXaJBBtBuqEz9wijTtqcz809TarA6H0kciZVyo5&caseno=Cr.A(DB)/474/2004&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010113012004&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.