Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurmej Singh vs State Of Punjab on 7 October, 2013
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
CRA No.793-SB of 2002 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Appeal No.793-SB of 2002
Date of decision:07.10.2013
Gurmej Singh
...Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab
..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr.Baljinder Singh, Advocate,
for the appellant.
Mr.K.S.Aulakh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
for the State.
Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. (Oral)
The pith and substance of the facts & evidence, unfolded during the course of trial, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant criminal appeal and emanating from the record, as claimed by the prosecution, are that, the marriage of appellant-convict Gurmej Singh son of Gulzar Singh (for brevity 'the appellant') was solemnized with Paramjit Kaur (since deceased), daughter of complainant Balwinder Kaur (PW1) (for short "the complainant"), about six months prior to the present occurrence. Although, sufficient dowry articles were stated to have been given by her at the time of marriage of her daughter, but the appellant was not satisfied with it. He used to pick quarrels and demanded more money from her. She narrated the entire tale of woe to the complainant. They requested him not to harass her as they were unable to fulfill their illegal demand on account of paucity of funds. According to the Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 2 complainant that one month prior to the present occurrence, she had come to her house and stated that the appellant gave beatings to her and demanded more money. They took and left her in the matrimonial home. Thereafter, they returned back. The same thing was claimed to have been happened two days prior to the present occurrence. The complainant requested the appellant not to harass her(deceased), but in vain.
2. The case of the prosecution further proceeds that on 12.05.2000 at about 3.00 PM, Sawinder Singh, sister's husband of the complainant, telephonically informed the complainant that Paramjit Kaur had consumed some poisonous substance and had died on account of mis-behaviour of the appellant. On receipt of the information, the complainant(PW1), his son Bikramjit Singh (PW2), brother-in-law(Jeth) Avtar Singh and father-in-law Dalip Singh reached her matrimonial home, where her dead body was lying. The complainant claimed that her daughter Paramjit Kaur had consumed some poisonous substance on account of harassment and demand of dowry by the appellant. In this manner, he has committed the dowry death. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of statement (Ex.PA) of the complainant, the instant case was registered against the appellant, vide FIR No.53 dated 12.5.2000(Ex.PA/2), for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Ghuman, District Gurdaspur, in the manner described here-in-above.
3. After completion of the investigation, the final police report (challan) was submitted by the police. Having completed all the codal formalities, the appellant was accordingly charge-sheeted for the commission of indicated offence. As, he did not plead guilty and claimed trial, therefore, the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution by the Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 3 trial Court.
4. Sequelly, the prosecution, in order to substantiate the crime against the appellant, examined complainant Balwinder Kaur as PW1, who has deposed in the following terms:-
"Deceased Paramjit Kaur was my daughter and was married to accused Gurmej Singh today present in the court about six months prior to her death. The couple resided at village Chaul Chak, Teh. Pathankot. Again said Teh. Batala, Distt. Gurdaspur P.S.Ghoman.
That, at the marriage, we had given dowry articles according to our status and means. However, the accused was not happy over it. My daughter used to tell me about the unhappiness of the accused over the dowry. Deceased also told me that the accused demanded money, more dowry articles and also used to beat her.
That, one month prior to her death, the deceased had told me about the conduct of the accused and then only I, my husband Balkar Singh, my son Bikramjit Singh had gone to the house of the accused and also took along with us my deceased daughter and left her there at her matrimonial home. We met the accused and made fervent request with folded hands not to torture our daughter and to raise further demand of dowry as we had already given dowry articles according to our means.
That, I alone had gone on 10.5.2000 to meet my daughter at her matrimonial home but no talk took place and I returned back on 11.5.2000 and thereafter, we received a telephonic message on 12.5.2000 from Surinder Singh my sister's husband (Jija) that my daughter Paramjit Kaur had consumed some poisonous substance and that she had died.
That, after the receipt of the telephonic message, I, father-in-law Dalip Singh, my husband's elder brother Avtar Singh (Jeth) and my son Bikramjit Singh reached the house of the accused at village Chaul Chak at 5.30 P.M. and saw the dead body of my daughter Paramjit Kaur lying in the house.
My daughter has died due to the cruelty, heaped on her by the accused. My statement was recorded by the police. The same was read over to me and after admitting its correctness I thumb marked the same. My statement is Ex.PA."
5. Likewise, PW2 Bikramjit Singh (son of the complainant) has supported the prosecution case. Instead of reproducing his entire statement and in order to avoid the repetition, suffice it to say that he has fully corroborated the statement of his mother PW1 on all vital counts, as regards, Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 4 the demand of dowry and cash is concerned.
6. Now adverting to the medical evidence, PW4 Dr.Gurmit Singh has conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Paramjit Kaur on 13.05.2000, vide post mortem report (Ex.PC). He, on receipt of report (Ex.PD) of the chemical examiner, opined, by way of his report (Ex.PE) that the cause of death in this case was due to Organo Phosphorous (poison).
7. Similarly, PW3 HC Jaswinder Singh has stated that on 13.05.2000, he was associated with the investigation by DSP Baldev Singh, who had taken into possession the clothes of the deceased in a sealed parcel, by virtue of recovery memo (Ex.PB) in his presence, which was attested by him and HC Talwinder Singh. PW5 DSP Baldev Singh has maintained that on 12.05.2000, on receipt of intimation from SHO of Police Station, Ghuman, he reached the village Chohal Chak (place of occurrence). He verified the investigation. On 13.05.2000, he took into possession one shirt (Ex.P1), Salwar (Ex.P2), Baniyan (Ex.P3) and chunni (Ex.P4) of the deceased, by means of recovery memo (Ex.PB). He arrested the accused on 16.05.2000, vide arrest/search memos (Exs.PG and PH). PW6 HC Talwinder Singh moved an application (Ex.PI), on the basis of which, the concerned doctor conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. After post-mortem examination, he handed over the dead body to Bikramjit Singh (PW2), by way of receipt (Ex.PJ). PW7 HC Kulwant Singh and PW8 MHC Sohan Lal are the formal witnesses, who have tendered their respective affidavits (Exs.PK and Ex.PL) to complete the chain of link evidence. PW9 ASI Joginder Singh, on receipt of ruqa (Ex.PA), registered the formal FIR (Ex.PA/2) on 12.05.2000. PW11 Satish Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 5 Chander, Draftsman has prepared the scaled site plan (EX.PP) of the place of occurrence.
8. The last to note is the testimony of PW10 Inspector Baldev Singh, who has deposed that on 12.05.2000, he was present at Bus-stand Ghuman, where complainant Balwinder Kaur met him and made her statement (Ex.PA). She thumb marked the same in token of its correctness. He made his endorsement (Ex.PA/1) and sent it to the police station for registration of the case, on the basis of which, formal FIR (Ex.PA/2) was recorded by ASI Joginder Singh. Thereafter, he visited the place of occurrence and prepared the inquest report (Ex.PM) of the dead body. He has also prepared the rough site plan (Ex.PO) of the spot with its correct marginal notes. He has testified his entire investigation.
9. After close of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellant was recorded. The entire incriminating material/evidence was put to enable him to explain any circumstance appearing against him therein, as contemplated under section 313 Cr.PC. However, he has stoutly denied the prosecution evidence in its entirety and pleaded false implication.
10. In order to prove the line of defence, he has examined DW1 Dr. Ravin Soni, who has stated that on 11.05.2000, Gurmej Singh son of Gulzar Singh was admitted as an indoor patient in Baba Nand Singh Ishar Singh Charitable Hospital, Nanaksar (Kaleran), Tehsil Jagraon, District Ludhiana. He was diagnosed as a case of Gastro-enteritis and remained admitted till 12.05.2000. He was discharged, vide discharge slip (Ex.D2). DW2 Rajwant Singh, Ahlmad, has maintained that a criminal complaint titled as "Kultar Singh v. Lakha Singh & others" (Ex.D3) was pending against the accused, including Gurmej Singh son of Gulzar Singh under Section 326 etc. IPC and Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 6 as per interim order dated 11.05.2000, all the accused were present in the trial Court. This is the total oral as well as documentary evidence brought on record by the parties.
11. Taking into consideration the entire evidence on record by the parties, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (in short "RI") for a period of ten years, to pay a fine of `2,000/- and in default thereof, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. An amount of `50,000/- was also awarded as compensation to be paid to the complainant, for having committed an offence punishable u/s 304-B IPC, by means of impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.02.2002, by the trial Judge.
12. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal. That is how I am seized of the matter.
13. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the evidence on record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present appeal deserves to be partly accepted in this context.
14. As indicated here-in-above, the appellant was only convicted for the commission of dowry death. Section 304-B IPC escalates that "Where the death of a woman is caused by any 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."
Rani Seema2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 7
15. Therefore, a conjoint and meaningful reading of this provision, would reveal that the prosecution is legally required to prove the following essential ingredients before invoking the provisions of Section 304-B IPC:-
(i) The death of wife should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances;
(ii) Such death should have been occurred within seven years of the marriage;
(iii) She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband; and
(iv)Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with demand of dowry.
(v) Such cruelty and harassment was made soon before her death.
16. What cannot possibly be disputed here is that the marriage of appellant was solemnized with Paramjit Kaur(deceased), according to Sikh Rites and Ceremonies and she committed suicide and died an unnatural death within a period of six months of her marriage. Thus, the initial two premises of dowry death stand established on record.
17. Such, thus, being the legal position and evidence on record, now the core controversy, which invites an immediate attention of this Court, and that arises for determination in this appeal is, as to whether the indicated 3rd to 5th essential ingredients are complete or not?
18. Having regard to the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, to me, the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offence of dowry death against the appellant. However, at the same time, it stands proved on record that the appellant had abetted and driven the deceased to commit suicide and he is liable to be convicted and sentenced for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 306 IPC, for the reasons mentioned here-in-below.
19. As is evident, the prosecution claimed that sufficient dowry Rani Seema articles were given by the complainant at the time of the marriage of her 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 8 daughter, but the appellant was not satisfied. The statements of PW1 and PW2 that the appellant used to demand dowry articles and money, are as vague as anything and very general in nature. How, when, in what manner and what type of dowry articles were demanded by the appellant, remains an unfolded mystery. There is not an iota of evidence on record, much less cogent, even to suggest remotely that the deceased was subjected to any legally required cruelty or harassment soon before her death by the appellant on account of demand of dowry. Moreover, there was no occasion for the appellant to demand dowry and cash from the complainant, whose husband was employed as a Driver in Pepsu Roadways, at a monthly salary of `5,000/- only. PW2-Bikramjit Singh, brother of the deceased, has also admitted that his father was getting salary of `2,000/- per month and they have no other source of income except his father's salary. Even they did not have the requisite funds and the marriage between the parties was solemnized in the house of Surinder Singh, brother-in-law(Jija) of the complainant in village Bhoje. PW1 and PW2 have so admitted in their cross-examination that the expenses of the marriage were partly born out by Surinder Singh and partly by them. Therefore, the alleged demand of dowry, now sought to be projected by PW1 and PW2, pales into insignificance.
20. Although, the plea was made to resort, to the legal presumption envisaged in Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act(hereinafter to be referred as "the Act"), but to me, it was imperative for the prosecution, to invoke the aforesaid legal presumption, to prove that "soon before her death", she was subjected to such cruelty or harassment on account of demand of dowry, which is miserably missing in the present case. What the Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 9 prosecution has achieved in proving at the most was that there was persisting disputes between the two sides and she was treated with cruelty and nothing more. That means, in order to invoke the provisions of dowry death, there should be a perceptible nexus between her death and the dowry related harassment or cruelty soon before her death. Preceding on these premises, the presumption arising under section 113-B of the Act could not legally be invoked against the appellant in the absence of specific evidence of legally required harassment and cruelty for demand of dowry soon before her death. In the absence of indicated essential ingredients of Section 304-B IPC, which are totally lacking in the instant case, the legal presumption would not come to the help of the prosecution. This matter is no more res integra and is now well settled.
21. An identical question came to be determined by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case Appasaheb and another v. State of Maharashtra 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 747, wherein, having interpreted the provisions of dowry death prescribed under section 304-B IPC, it was ruled as under (para 9) :-
"Two essential ingredients of Section 304-B IPC, apart from others, are (i) death of woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances, and (ii) woman is subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for "dowry". The explanation appended to sub-section (1) of Section 304-B IPC says that "dowry" shall have the same meaning as in Section 2 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Section 2 of Dowry Prohibition Act reads as under :-
"2. Definition of "dowry" - In this Act "dowry" means any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly -
(a) by one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage; or
(b) by the parent of either party to a marriage or by any other person, to either party to the marriage or to any other person, at or before or any time after the marriage in connection with the marriage of the said parties, but does not include dower or mahr in the case of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (shariat) applies."
In view of the aforesaid definition of the word "dowry" any property or valuable security should be given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly at or before or any time after the marriage and in connection with the marriage of the said parties. Therefore, the giving or taking of property or valuable security must have some connection with the marriage of the parties and a correlation between the giving or taking of property or valuable security Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 10 with the marriage of the parties is essential. Being a penal provision it has to be strictly construed. Dowry is a fairly well known social custom or practice in India. It is well settled principle of interpretation of Statutes that if the Act is passed with reference to a particular trade, business or transaction and words are used which everybody conversant with that trade, business or transaction knows or understands to have a particular meaning in it, then the words are to be construed as having that particular meaning. (See Union of India v. Garware Nylons Ltd., AIR 1996 S.C. 3509 and Chemicals and Fibres of India v. Union of India, AIR 1997 S.C. 558). A demand for money on account of some financial stringency or for meeting some urgent domestic expenses or for purchasing manure cannot be termed as a demand for dowry as the said word is normally understood. The evidence adduced by the prosecution does not, therefore, show that any demand for "dowry" as defined in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was made by the appellants as what was allegedly asked for was some money for meeting domestic expenses and for purchasing manure. Since an essential ingredient of Section 304-B IPC viz. demand for dowry is not established, the conviction of the appellants cannot be sustained."
22. Therefore, to me, the mere vague and general allegations that the appellant used to demand dowry and cash, ipso facto, is not sufficient to convict the appellant for dowry death. The ratio of law laid down in the aforesaid judgment "mutatis mutandis" is applicable to the facts of the present case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand. In that eventuality, the appellant deserves to be and is hereby acquitted, for the commission of offence of dowry death punishable u/s 304-B IPC.
23. Be that as it may, the perusal of the evidence on record would reveal that the appellant was residing under the same roof, where the deceased died an unnatural death. It was the duty of the appellant to explain the reasons of her death as to how, why and in what manner, she had died and what prompted her to commit suicide. He has utterly failed to do so in this respect. On the contrary, he has set-up and unsuccessfully attempted to prove defence plea that he was not present in the house at the relevant time, but the same would not come to his rescue in this relevant connection. The complainant(PW1) is the star/main witness of the prosecution. In cross- examination, she has categorically admitted that her daughter(Paramjit Kaur) used to tell her that the appellant was having illicit relations with some female and whenever she tried to stop him from his extra-marital Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 11 relationship with the lady, he used to harass and beat her. Not only that, she has further acknowledged that the marriage of son of her brother-in-law Surinder Singh was performed one month prior to the present occurrence. The deceased had also attended the marriage. The appellant refused to attend the marriage, as he was annoyed over some incident. At the time of this marriage, her daughter(deceased) had told her that the appellant had given knife blows to his real brother Nirmal Singh, as he suspected him, having illicit relationship with her(Paramjit Kaur). Nirmal Singh reported the matter to the police. In other words, it stands proved on record that the appellant has harassed and treated his wife Paramjit Kaur with cruelty not due to demand of dowry, but on account of her objection and protest of his extra-marital relations with some other lady. Not only that, he was also suspecting that his brother Nirmal Singh was having illicit relationship with his wife(Paramjit Kaur). In this manner, she was fed-up with the behaviour and the appellant abetted her to commit suicide. Indeed, it had driven her to commit suicide by consuming poisonous substance within a period of six months of her marriage.
24. Thus, it would be seen that the peculiar facts and special circumstances, emitting from the evidence on record would naturally suggest that the deceased was fed-up with the indicated conduct of the appellant. She had been subjected to cruelty in the manner indicated here- in-above. Hence, the conduct of the appellant, to drive his wife to commit suicide, squarely falls within the ambit of, and he is guilty for the commission of an offence punishable u/s 306 IPC. Although, he was charged u/s 304-B IPC and was not charge-sheeted u/s 306 IPC, but still, he can legally be convicted for lesser offence punishable u/s 306 IPC, in view Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 12 of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case K.Prema S.Rao and another v. Yadla Srinivasa Rao and others (2003) 1 SCC 217. Sequelly, the same view was again reiterated by this Court in case Jit Singh v. State of Punjab, CRA No.406-SB of 2003, decided on 5.9.2013.
25. Therefore, if the epitome of the totality of the facts & evidence, oozing out from the evidence on record, as discussed here-in-above, is put together, then, to my mind, the conclusion is inescapable and irresistible that the appellant-husband had harassed and treated Paramjit Kaur (deceased) with cruelty and his conduct had driven her to commit suicide. Meaning thereby, he had abetted the commission of the crime of suicide and he is liable to be and is hereby convicted & sentenced for the commission of an offence punishable u/s 306 IPC in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
26. Now adverting to the question of sentence, as per custody certificate, the appellant(who was earlier convicted & sentenced u/s 304-B IPC (now u/s 306 IPC) has already undergone the considerable period of his sentence of imprisonment for a period of two years, eight months and twenty six days(about 2¾ years). He has already faced the pangs and suffered the agony of protracted trial and appeal for the last more than 13¼ years. He was a young person of 26-27 years of age at the relevant time of commission of offence. There is no other person to support his old parents. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. The learned State counsel has acknowledged this factual matrix. In this view of the matter, to me, it would be expedient in the interest and justice would be sub-served if the appellant-husband is sentenced to, the period already undergone by him for the commission of an offence punishable u/s Rani Seema 2013.10.10 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA No.793-SB of 2002 13 306 IPC.
27. No other legal point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the counsel for the parties.
28. In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant appeal is partly accepted. Appellant-Gurmej Singh is acquitted of the charge u/s 304-B IPC. At the same time, he is held guilty and convicted for the commission of indicated crime prescribed and punishable u/s 306 IPC. Consequently, he is sentenced to the period(two years, eight months and twenty six days) already undergone by him. However, the sentence of fine and order of compensation are hereby maintained. The impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence are hereby modified to the extent and in the manner depicted here-in-above.
Needless to mention that the necessary compliance and procedural consequences would naturally follow.
sd/-
October 07, 2013 (Mehinder Singh Sullar)
AS/seema Judge
Whether to be referred to reporter? Yes/No
Rani Seema
2013.10.10 09:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh