Vishal Ravidas @ Mukesh Kumar vs The State of Bihar
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5495 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2020 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada
======================================================
1. Vishal Ravidas @ Mukesh Kumar, S/o- Rambalak Ravidas, Village-
Koriyana, P.S.-Govindpur, Distt- Nawada
2. Rambalak Ravidas (Abated vide Hon'ble Court Order dated- 07.08.26) S/o-
Shivbachan Ravidas Village- Koriyana P.S.-Govindpur, Distt- Nawada
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Niraj Kumar, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Arjun Prasad No. 1, Advocate
For the State : Mr. S. Ashfaque Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 25-08-2026
Mr. Niraj Kumar, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellants, Mr. Arjun Prasad No. 1, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, and Mr. S.
Ashfaque Ahmad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing on behalf of the State, are present and have been
heard.
2. It is pertinent to mention that after filing of the
instant appeal, appellant No. 2, namely, Rambalak Ravidas, who
was the father of appellant No. 1, namely, Vishal Ravidas @
Mukesh Kumar, and the father-in-law of the deceased, died.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
2/27
Consequently, the appeal, insofar as appellant No. 2, namely,
Rambalak Ravidas, is concerned, stood abated vide order dated
07.08.2026. Accordingly, the present appeal is being considered
and decided only with respect to the surviving appellant No. 1,
namely, Vishal Ravidas @ Mukesh Kumar (hereinafter referred
to as the “appellant”).
3. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred by
the appellant against the Judgment of Conviction dated
18.10.2024 and the Order of Sentence dated 29.10.2024 passed
in Sessions Trial No. 94 of 2021, arising out of Govindpur P.S.
Case No. 135 of 2020, by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VII, Nawada, whereby the appellant and one other
accused were convicted for the offences punishable under
Sections 304B/34 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for
short, “IPC”). Pursuant to the said conviction, the appellant was
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten
years for the offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of the
IPC. He was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment
for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the offence
punishable under Section 323/34 of the IPC, and in default of
payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of
one month. The learned trial court further directed that the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
3/27
period already undergone by the appellant in custody in the
present case shall be set off in terms of Section 428 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), corresponding to
Section 468 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for
short, “BNSS”).
4. Prosecution Story:-
The prosecution case, as set out in the fardbeyan
of the informant, Lalkeshwer Ravidas, is that on 29.05.2020 at
about 7:00 P.M., he received the information over his mobile
phone from the matrimonial home of his daughter that she had
died due to an electric shock while ironing clothes. Thereafter,
the informant reached his daughter’s matrimonial village, where
he came to know from the villagers that his daughter had
allegedly been murdered by her in-laws. It is further alleged that
when the informant, along with his family members, went to the
matrimonial home of the deceased for performing her last rites,
he questioned his son-in-law and his parents regarding the death
of his daughter. At that time, the accused persons, acting in
furtherance of their common intention, allegedly assaulted the
informant and his family members accompanying him. Thus,
according to the prosecution, the deceased died an unnatural
death at her matrimonial home.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
4/27
5. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant,
Lalkeshwer Ravidas, Govindpur P.S. Case No. 135 of 2020,
dated 10.07.2020, was registered against the appellant and other
accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 341,
323, 504, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short,
“IPC”). Consequently, the criminal law was set into motion.
6. Upon completion of the investigation, the
Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet on 30.09.2020
against the appellant, Vishal Ravidas, and his father, Rambalak
Ravidas (appellant No. 2, whose appeal has abated vide order
dated 07.08.2026 passed by this Court), for the offences
punishable under Sections 302, 304B, 341, 323, 504 and 34 of
the IPC. The investigation against Sharda Devi, mother of the
appellant, was stated to be continuing.
7. Upon submission of the charge-sheet, the learned
Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nawada took cognizance of the
offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 304B/34, 341/34,
504/34 and 323/34 of the IPC against the appellant and his
father. Since the offences were exclusively triable by the Court
of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for
trial in accordance with law.
8. Upon committal of the case, charges were
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
5/27
framed against the appellant for the offences punishable under
Sections 302/34, 304B/34, 341/34, 504/34 and 323/34 of the
IPC. The charges were read over and explained to the appellant
in Hindi, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
9. During the trial, the prosecution examined the
following witnesses:
Sl.
No.
Prosecution
Witness No.
Name of the witness Description
1. PW-1 Bipin Das Nephew of the
Informant
2. PW-2 Meena Devi Mother of the
deceased
3. PW-3 Manish Kumar Brother of the
deceased
4. PW-4 Lalkeshwer Ravidas Father of the
deceased,
Informant
5. PW-5 Dr. Ajay Kumar Medical Officer
6. PW-6 Narendra Prasad Investigating
Officer
10. The prosecution also proved the following
documents and got them marked as exhibits:
Sl. No. Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Attested
By/Prove
d By
1. Exhibit-P-
1/W5
The signature of the doctor on
the postmortem report as well
as its contents
PW-5
2. Exhibit-2 The signature of the I.O. on
the charge-sheet
PW-6
3. Exhibit-3 The signature of the I.O. on
the fardbeyan
PW-6
4. Exhibit-4 The short signature of the I.O.
on the formal FIR
PW-6
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
6/27
11 . Upon completion of the prosecution evidence,
the statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313
of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “Cr.P.C.”). The
appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances put to him
and appearing against him in the prosecution evidence, pleaded
his innocence, and stated that he had been falsely implicated in
the present case.
12. During trial, the appellant has produced two
witnesses in his defence who are as follows:-
Sl.
No.
Defence Witness
No.
Name of the witness Description
1. DW-1 Kapil Deo Prasad
Co-villager
of the
appellant
2. DW-2 Upendra Kumar Das
Co-villager
of the
appellant
13. I have heard learned counsels for the parties
and perused the impugned judgment, the evidence adduced by
both sides and the statement of the appellant recorded under
Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.
14. The appellant was prosecuted for the charged
offences relating to murder, insult, wrongful restraint and dowry
death as well as voluntarily causing hurt to the deceased.
15. The principal allegation against the appellant is
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
7/27
that the deceased, namely, Arti Devi, daughter of the informant,
was subjected to physical cruelty on account of and in
connection with the demand for dowry of Rs. 50,000/- and a
motorcycle, which ultimately resulted in her death.
Relevant Facts of the Prosecution Case:-
16. The relevant facts emerging from the
prosecution case are summarized as follows:—
(i) On 29.05.2020, the informant, who is the father
of the deceased, received the information that his daughter had
died due to electrocution.
(ii) Upon receiving the aforesaid information, the
informant, along with his wife, went to the matrimonial home of
the deceased, where they found their daughter lying dead.
According to the informant, the in-laws of the deceased got her
postmortem examination conducted at Nawada.
(iii) After the postmortem examination, the dead
body of the deceased was cremated in the presence of the
informant and his son, Manish Kumar.
(iv) After the cremation, on the same day in the
evening, the informant and his son stayed at Koriana, the village
of the deceased's in-laws, on account of rainfall. On the
following morning, the informant allegedly heard people in the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
8/27
neighbourhood whispering that the deceased had been killed,
which raised suspicion in his mind. Thereafter, he questioned
his son-in-law, the appellant, regarding the cause of the
deceased's death and alleged that his daughter had been killed
and that the appellant had misrepresented the cause of her death
to him. It is alleged that the appellant thereupon abused and
assaulted the informant. During the course of the occurrence,
the appellant's father and mother also allegedly joined in
abusing and assaulting him and forced him to flee from their
house.
(v) The informant recorded his fardbeyan at Sadar
Hospital, Nawada, on 31.05.2020 at 13:00 hours and stated
therein that he was undergoing treatment at that time.
16.1. The aforesaid facts have emerged primarily
from the narration given by the informant in his fardbeyan.
Appraisal of the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses in the light of above-mentioned relevant facts:-
17. I now proceed to consider the evidence of the
prosecution witnesses. Among the witnesses examined by the
prosecution before the learned trial court, PW-1 to PW-4 are
primarily witnesses to the facts of the case.
18. PW-1, Bipin Das, cousin brother of the deceased,
deposed in his examination-in-chief that on 29.05.2020 at about
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
9/27
4:00 P.M., he received information regarding the illness of the
deceased. Thereafter, he went to Koriyana village, the village of
the deceased's in-laws, to meet her and found her lying dead on
a bed. He stated that he noticed signs of assault on the body of
the deceased and a black mark around her neck. He further
stated that, on being asked about the cause of death, the
appellant disclosed that his wife (the deceased) had died due to
electrocution. However, upon further inquiry, it allegedly came
to light that the deceased had not come into contact with electric
current and had instead been killed by strangulation. He further
deposed in his examination-in-chief that, when the appellant
was questioned regarding the actual cause of death, the
appellant abused and assaulted PW-4, Lalkeshwer Ravidas, the
informant. According to this witness, the appellant's father and
mother also joined in abusing and assaulting the informant. With
regard to the previous conduct of the appellant and his family
members towards the deceased, the witness deposed that, about
six months after her marriage, the deceased had complained
over the mobile phone that a motorcycle and money were being
demanded from her. According to this witness, the deceased was
killed as the demand made by the appellant could not be
fulfilled.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
10/27
18.1. In his cross-examination, the witness stated that
there had been a love affair between the deceased and the
appellant. He further stated that, when he went to the house of
the appellant, he found the deceased lying dead on the bed. In
paragraph 4 of his cross-examination, he stated that no treatment
was being provided to the deceased when he reached the house
of her in-laws. He further stated in paragraph 7 of his cross-
examination that the informant recorded his fardbeyan after the
cremation of the deceased.
19. Now, I come to the evidence of PW-4,
Lalkeshwer Ravidas, who is the father of the deceased as well as
the informant of the case and is an important witness for the
prosecution. He stated in his examination-in-chief that, at the
time of the marriage of the deceased, dowry articles and gifts
were given. After her marriage, the deceased resided at her
matrimonial home for about six to seven months. According to
this witness, the appellant and his father and mother demanded a
motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- in cash from the deceased, which
came to his knowledge through mobile phone communication
with her. He further deposed that, in order to fulfil the demand
made by the appellant and his family members, a sum of Rs.
50,000/- was paid. Thereafter, the appellant started demanding a
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
11/27
motorcycle, which could not be fulfilled. He stated in paragraph
No. 2 of his examination-in-chief that, on account of non-
fulfilment of the demand for a motorcycle, the in-laws of the
deceased started assaulting her. He further stated that on
29.05.2020 at about 7:00 P.M., he received the information
through mobile phone from the appellant that his daughter was
unwell. Thereafter, he, along with his wife, son and nephew,
namely, Bipin Das (PW-1), proceeded to Koriyana, the
matrimonial village of the deceased, and reached there at about
8:00 P.M. Upon reaching there, they found his daughter lying
dead in the courtyard. He noticed bleeding from her mouth and
nose and swelling around her neck.
19.1. According to this witness, on the following
morning, the appellant informed the Govindpur Police Station,
whereupon the police came to the place of occurrence and took
the dead body of the deceased to Sadar Hospital, Nawada, for
postmortem examination. After the postmortem examination,
the dead body was brought back to Koriyana village, where the
cremation was performed. Thereafter, on account of heavy
rainfall, he and the other members of his family stayed at a
Government School in Koriyana village. On the following
morning, they allegedly came to know from persons in the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
12/27
neighbourhood that his daughter had been killed by her in-laws
on account of non-fulfilment of the demand for dowry.
Thereafter, he went to the house of the appellant to enquire
about the actual cause of his daughter's death. But according to
this witness, the appellant and his family members abused and
assaulted him, whereafter he went to Sadar Hospital, Nawada,
for treatment and recorded his fardbeyan there. The witness
identified his fardbeyan and proved the same, which was
marked as Exhibit-3.
19.2. The witness was cross-examined at length
with regard to the facts stated by him in his examination-in-
chief. On a careful consideration of his testimony, this Court
does not find any material or significant contradiction between
his statement in examination-in-chief and the facts elicited
during his cross-examination.
20. The evidence of PW-2 and PW-3, who are the
mother and brother of the deceased, respectively, is broadly
consistent with the testimony of PW-4.
21. I shall now proceed to consider the evidence of
PW-5, who conducted the postmortem examination of the dead
body of the deceased. During the course of the postmortem
examination, he noted the following external injuries on the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
13/27
body of the deceased:-
External Injury:-
Rigor Mortis Absent*
Upper and lower limbs, Left foot medially*
multiple abrasions 1/4” dimension
Left side the cheek multiple abrasion in four*
in number 1/4” diameter
Each abrasion- back the both scapular*
region bruises 1.5” diameter
Cause of Death- The doctor opined the cause
of death of the deceased as asphyxia due to
constriction of the neck by pressure (strangulation).
21.1. During his cross-examination, he stated that
at the time of conducting the postmortem examination, he did
not notice any blood oozing from the mouth or nose of the
deceased. He further stated that he did not find any ash
smeared on the dead body of the deceased.
22. PW-6, Narendra Prasad, the Investigating
Officer, deposed regarding the initial registration of U.D. Case
No. 03 of 2020 and, thereafter, upon receipt of the fardbeyan
from the Town Police Station, regarding the registration of
Govindpur P.S. Case No. 135 of 2020, which constitutes the FIR
in the present case. He further deposed regarding the receipt of
the postmortem examination report of the deceased, recording
the statements of the witnesses, inspection of the place of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
14/27
occurrence, and other steps taken during the course of
investigation. During his cross-examination, he stated that he
had not recorded the statement of any independent person, as no
independent person was available for the said purpose.
Submissions on behalf of the appellant:-
23. Mr. Niraj Kumar, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant, has submitted that PW-1 to PW-4, being
prosecution witnesses, are highly interested witnesses and,
therefore, the conviction of the appellant by the learned trial
court, based primarily upon their testimony, is not sustainable. It
has been contended that the prosecution has failed to establish
that, soon before the death of the deceased, any demand as
alleged was made by the appellant from the deceased. Learned
counsel has further submitted that the conduct of the appellant
immediately after the alleged occurrence has not been properly
appreciated by the learned trial court. According to the
informant himself, the factum of electrocution of the deceased
was immediately communicated by the appellant to the parental
relatives of the deceased. It is submitted that such conduct on
the part of the appellant clearly demonstrates his bona fides,
which aspect has not been properly appreciated by the learned
trial court. Learned counsel has further submitted that although
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
15/27
certain injuries were found on the body of the deceased, the
medical expert, who was examined as PW-5, stated in his cross-
examination that the injuries found on the body of the deceased
were possible due to a fall from an upper surface to a lower
surface. It has further been submitted that, in the present case,
the essential ingredients necessary to attract the offence
punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code are not
satisfied. It has also been contended that the formal FIR was
instituted after a delay of about 40 days from the date of death
of the deceased, and no satisfactory explanation for such delay
has been furnished by the prosecution. Learned counsel has
further submitted that it is an admitted position that the marriage
between the deceased and the appellant was a love marriage.
Therefore, according to him, there was no occasion or reason for
the appellant or his family members to demand Rs. 50,000/- and
a motorcycle from the deceased or her parental family members.
It is, thus, contended that the allegations levelled by the
prosecution, particularly through the parental relatives of the
deceased, are wholly unbelievable. It has further been argued
that, in the fardbeyan of the informant, which forms the basis of
the prosecution case, there is no allegation whatsoever regarding
any demand of Rs. 50,000/- or a motorcycle. According to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
16/27
learned counsel, such allegations were introduced subsequently
during the course of trial, and the prosecution witnesses
materially developed the prosecution story. Such improvements,
it is submitted, cast a serious doubt upon the veracity of the
prosecution case.
23.1. It has further been argued that, in the facts and
circumstances of the present case, the prosecution was not
entitled to the benefit of the presumption under Section 113B of
the Indian Evidence Act, as the foundational requirement for
raising such presumption is absent. According to learned
counsel, the prosecution has failed to establish that the deceased
was subjected to cruelty or harassment soon before her death in
connection with, or in relation to, any demand for dowry. In
support of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel has placed
reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 721 of 2012
and another analogous case , particularly upon paragraph Nos.
15, 16 and 17 and paragraph Nos. 23 to 26 thereof. Learned
counsel for the appellant has further placed reliance upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karan
Singh vs. State of Haryana , passed in Criminal Appeal No.
1076 of 2014 .
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
17/27
23.2. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellant has
submitted that the medical evidence, by itself, is not sufficient to
establish the guilt of the appellant for the offences with which
he has been charged. In support of this contention, learned
counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Nagendra Sah vs. The State of
Bihar , passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1903 of 2019 ,
particularly paragraph Nos. 19, 20 and 23 thereof.
Submissions on behalf of the Respondents:-
24. In response, Mr. Arjun Prasad No. 1, learned
counsel appearing for the informant, and Mr. S. Ashfaque
Ahmad, learned APP for the State, have submitted that the
deceased, who was the wife of the appellant, died within
fourteen months of her marriage. It is contended that the
medical findings recorded in the postmortem report, particularly
with regard to the external injuries found on the body of the
deceased, fully corroborate the prosecution case and are
sufficient to establish that the deceased had been subjected to
assault soon before her death, which ultimately resulted in her
death. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP have
further submitted that the appellant has taken a false defence
regarding the cause of death of the deceased. According to them,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
18/27
there is no material on record to substantiate the appellant's plea
that the deceased died as a result of electrocution. It is further
submitted that even the postmortem report does not contain any
finding which supports such a defence. So far as the delay in
registration of the formal FIR is concerned, it has been
submitted that such delay was attributable to the police
authorities and not to the informant, as the fardbeyan of the
informant was recorded on the second day following the
occurrence of the unnatural death of the deceased. It has, in fact,
been contended that there was collusion between the accused
persons and the police authorities. Initially, an U.D. Case was
instituted by the police on the basis of the steps taken by the
appellant and his family members. Thereafter, when the
informant became suspicious regarding the circumstances
surrounding the death of the deceased, he made enquiries from
the accused persons, including the appellant, and subsequently
took steps for initiation of appropriate legal action and lodging
of the FIR. It has further been submitted that the conduct of the
accused persons, including the appellant, was not proper when
the informant made enquiries from them regarding the cause of
death of the deceased. According to the learned counsel,
immediately after the informant came to know from the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
19/27
villagers about the suspicious circumstances surrounding the
death of the deceased, he confronted the accused persons
regarding the same, whereupon he was assaulted by the accused
persons, including the appellant. In this regard, reliance has
been placed upon the fardbeyan of the informant.
Consideration and Analysis :-
25. In the light of the above submissions and
contentions advanced on behalf of both sides, I have carefully
perused and considered the evidences adduced by the parties, as
well as the statement of the appellant recorded under Section
313 of the Cr.P.C.
26. The marriage of the deceased with the appellant
was solemnized on 16.04.2019, and she met an unnatural death
on 29.05.2020. Thus, the deceased died within fourteen months
of her marriage, thereby satisfying one of the essential statutory
requirements for attracting the offence punishable under Section
304B of the IPC.
27. As regards the other essential ingredients of the
said penal provision are concerned, multiple abrasions and
bruises were found on the left foot and cheek of the deceased,
and the medical expert opined that the cause of death was
“Asphyxia due to constriction of neck by pressure
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
20/27
(strangulation).” As regards the cause of death, the appellant
has principally taken the defence that the deceased came into
contact with electric current while ironing clothes, resulting in
electrocution and, consequently, her death. However, the
medical findings recorded in the post-mortem report,
particularly with regard to the external injuries found on the
body of the deceased and the opinion as to the cause of death,
do not lend any support to the said defence of the appellant.
There is nothing in the medical opinion to suggest that the
deceased had suffered electrocution. It is pertinent to note that,
contrary to the aforesaid defence, the appellant, while cross-
examining the medical expert, suggested that the injuries found
on the body of the deceased might have been sustained by her
falling from an upper surface to a lower surface after coming
into contact with electric current. Thus, the appellant appears to
have taken two mutually inconsistent stands, which do not
inspire the confidence of this Court. Further, upon perusal of the
evidence of the Investigating Officer, who inspected the place of
occurrence, I find no material on record suggesting that any
incident of electrocution had taken place. The Investigating
Officer has not disclosed the presence of any sign or
circumstance indicative of electrocution at the place of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
21/27
occurrence during his inspection. Moreover, the appellant did
not cross-examine the Investigating Officer or any other
prosecution witness in the light of his aforesaid defence. It is
also pertinent to note that, while recording his statement under
Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., the appellant did not state that the
deceased had died as a result of electrocution. The deceased was
admittedly present in the house of the appellant, from where her
dead body was subsequently found in the courtyard.
27.1. From the aforesaid discussion, it is evident
that the defence of electrocution taken by the appellant is not
supported by the evidence on record. In such circumstances, the
appellant was required to offer a plausible explanation regarding
the abrasions and bruises found on the body of the deceased,
particularly when the deceased was admittedly present in the
house of the appellant at the time of her death. No such
explanation has been furnished by the appellant. The
circumstances surrounding the occurrence and the injuries
sustained by the deceased were matters especially within the
knowledge of the appellant. Accordingly, this Court finds that,
in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the deceased
was subjected to physical assault soon before her death and that
her death was caused by strangulation. Thus, the second
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
22/27
essential ingredient for constituting the offence of dowry death
stands established.
28. As regards the alleged demand of Rs. 50,000/-
and a motorcycle by the appellant from the deceased, it is true
that there is no whisper regarding such demand in the fardbeyan
of the informant. However, it is a settled proposition of law that
an informant is not required to disclose each and every fact
relating to the prosecution case in the first information given to
the police. The essential requirement is that the information
furnished to the police should disclose the commission of a
cognizable offence so as to set the criminal law in motion. It is
also relevant to note that the informant recorded his fardbeyan at
Sadar Hospital, Nawada, and, according to his version, he had
been assaulted by the accused persons, including the appellant,
when he made enquiries from them regarding the cause of death
of the deceased. In such circumstances, particularly when the
informant had lost his newly-wedded daughter and the conduct
of the appellant towards him was allegedly improper, it would
be unrealistic to expect him to narrate, in the fardbeyan itself,
each and every detail relating to the alleged commission of the
dowry death. However, during the course of trial, while
deposing before the learned trial court, not only the informant
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
23/27
but also the witnesses who were the parental relatives of the
deceased gave a detailed account of the alleged occurrence as
well as the conduct of the appellant towards the deceased prior
to her death. Although it is an admitted position that the
marriage between the appellant and the deceased was a love
marriage, none of the prosecution witnesses stated before the
learned trial court that no dowry or articles in the nature of
dowry had been given by the parental family of the deceased at
the time of marriage. On the contrary, PW-2, the mother of the
deceased, specifically stated in her cross-examination that
dowry had been given at the time of marriage and that a
document had been prepared on court paper mentioning the
dowry articles. The mere fact that the marriage was a love
marriage cannot, by itself, exonerate the husband or his family
members from an allegation of dowry demand, nor can it be
presumed that no such demand could have been made after the
marriage. A demand for dowry may arise even after the
solemnization of a love marriage, and the same has to be
assessed on the basis of the evidence available on record. In the
present case, it is significant that, according to the testimony of
PW-2, who is the mother of the deceased, the appellant started
demanding Rs. 50,000/- and a motorcycle from her within ten
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
24/27
days of the marriage. She further stated that the demand for Rs.
50,000/- was subsequently fulfilled. The testimony of PW-2 in
this regard finds substantial corroboration from the evidence of
PW-3 and PW-4, who are the brother and father of the deceased,
respectively.
28.1. As regards the continuity of the alleged dowry
demand, it is evident from the evidence on record that the
deceased died within fourteen months of her marriage, and that
the appellant had started demanding Rs. 50,000/- and a
motorcycle from her within a few days of the marriage. The
evidence of the prosecution witnesses, particularly of the
parents and brother of the deceased, does not indicate that the
said demand was ever withdrawn or that normal and cordial
relations had been restored between the appellant and the
deceased thereafter. It is also to be borne in mind that an offence
of dowry death is ordinarily committed within the confines of
the matrimonial home, away from the presence of independent
witnesses. Consequently, in such cases, direct evidence
regarding the alleged acts of harassment or cruelty connected
with a dowry demand may not ordinarily be available. In cases
involving cruelty or harassment for dowry, the evidence of the
parental relatives of the deceased assumes significance, as the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
25/27
deceased would, in the ordinary course, be more likely to
confide in her parents, siblings, or other close parental relatives
regarding the ill-treatment, harassment, and demands allegedly
made by her husband or his family members.
28.2. The prosecution witnesses, particularly PW-1
to PW-4, were subjected to extensive cross-examination on
behalf of the accused/appellant. However, nothing material
could be elicited from their testimony to suggest that, during the
relevant period immediately preceding the death of the
deceased, the conduct and behaviour of the appellant towards
her were normal and cordial, or that she was not being subjected
to harassment in connection with the alleged demand for a
motorcycle. Thus, there is no material on record to indicate that
the demand made by the appellant had ceased or that the
matrimonial relationship had returned to normalcy. The
evidence on record, therefore, supports the inference that the
alleged demand continued from the time it was initially made
until the death of the deceased. Having regard to the
circumstances established on record, this Court finds that the
deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection
with the demand for a motorcycle and was thereafter
strangulated to death when the said demand remained
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
26/27
unfulfilled by the deceased or her parental family members.
Thus, the other essential conditions necessary for constituting
the offence of dowry death are also satisfied in the present case.
Accordingly, this Court finds that the prosecution has succeeded
in establishing all the essential ingredients necessary to attract
the offence punishable under Section 304B of the IPC.
Consequently, the statutory presumption under Section 113B of
the Indian Evidence Act is attracted in the facts and
circumstances of the present case. The appellant has failed to
bring on record any cogent or credible material sufficient to
rebut the said presumption.
Conclusion:-
29. Accordingly, upon an overall consideration of
the evidence and the findings recorded hereinabove, this Court
finds sufficient material on record to establish the commission
of the offence of dowry death by the appellant in respect of the
death of his wife. The learned trial court has rightly convicted
the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 304B
and 323 of the IPC and this Court finds no infirmity, illegality,
or perversity in the findings recorded by the learned trial court
warranting interference in the present appeal. On the contrary,
this Court finds sufficient material on record to affirm the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5495 of 2024 dt.25-08-2026
27/27
judgment of conviction passed against the appellant.
29.1. In the result, the impugned judgment of
conviction dated 18.10.2024 and the order of sentence dated
29.10.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-
VII, Nawada, in Sessions Trial No. 94 of 2021, arising out of
Govindpur P.S. Case No. 135 of 2020, whereby the appellant
has been convicted and sentenced, are hereby affirmed.
Consequently, the present appeal stands dismissed, being devoid
of merit.
30. Let a copy of this judgment, along with the trial
court records, be transmitted forthwith to the court concerned
for information, compliance, and necessary action.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
maynaz/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 01.09.2026
Transmission Date 01.09.2026