Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kulwant Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 11 September, 2013
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
......
Criminal Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001 (O&M)
.....
Date of decision:11.9.2013
Kulwant Singh and others
...Appellants
v.
State of Punjab
...Respondent
....
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr. G.S. Benipal,
Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Yogesh Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent-State.
......
Inderjit Singh, J.
Kulwant Singh, Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur
-appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 6.10.2001 passed by Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby the accused-appellants have been held guilty and convicted for the offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as `IPC'). They have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years each and to pay a fine of `2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each for the offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC.
The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the FIR in the Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [2] present case has been registered on the statement of Kulwant Singh son of Labh Singh, father of deceased Amarjit Kaur, who mainly stated that he has three daughters and a son and his eldest daughter Amarjit Kaur was married with accused Kulwant Singh son of Karam Singh and she had given birth to three children. The complainant also stated that his son-in- law Kulwant Singh used to live jointly with his brothers in separate rooms, but they had common courtyard. About six months earlier, Kulwant Singh accused had demanded the hand of his other daughter for his nephew, but he did not agree and on that account he started harassing his daughter and had stopped meeting them and his wife Surjit Kaur had gone to meet Amarjit Kaur and on return to the village she told the complainant that Darshan Singh Jeth (elder brother of Kulwant Singh) and Charanjit Kaur wife of Darshan Singh were harassing Amarjit Kaur on account of the refusal by the complainant to matrimonial alliance of their daughter Jaswinder Kaur and taunt her. The complainant stated that he married his younger daughter Jaswinder Kaur about a month ago and Kulwant Singh accused did not attend that marriage nor he allowed Amarjit Kaur to attend the marriage of her younger sister. The complainant stated that on 6.7.1999, he came to know that Amarjit Kaur had died on account of consuming some poisonous substance. Inquest proceedings were conducted. Dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. After verifying the investigation on 9.7.1999, the case was registered against Kulwant Singh, Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur. After necessary investigation, challan was presented. Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [3] On presentation of challan, the trial Court finding prima facie case against the accused framed charge for the offence under Section 306 IPC against accused Kulwant Singh, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined Dr. Naresh Kumar, Medical Officer as PW-1 and Kulwant Singh-complainant as PW-2 and thereafter the prosecution moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur and they were also ordered to be summoned to face trial for the offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC and on their appearance were charge-sheeted under said section, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In support of its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 Dr. Naresh Kumar, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Dasuya, who mainly deposed regarding the intimation sent to the SHO, Police Station Dasuya regarding admission of Amarjit Kaur wife of Kulwant Singh, as a case of suspected poisoning. The patient expired at 11.05 a.m. on 6.7.1999, while she was admitted in the hospital at 10.45 a.m. It is also stated that intimation regarding death of Amarjit Kaur was also sent. The patient was brought by Charanjit Kaur wife of Darshan Singh. PW-2 Dr. Anil Dhawan, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Dasuya mainly deposed regarding conducting post-mortem examination on the dead body of Amarjit Kaur on 7.7.1999 at 12.15 p.m. As per information of the doctor, the cause of death in this case was poisoning of aluminium phosphide, which is sufficient to cause death in an ordinary course of nature. PW-3 Kulwant Singh son of Labh Singh-complainant mainly deposed as per Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [4] prosecution version. PW-4 Surjit Kaur wife of Kulwant Singh and mother of the deceased deposed as per prosecution version. PW-5 Vijay Kumar, Draftsman deposed regarding preparing of scaled site plan Ex.PG. PW-6 Constable Sat Pal and PW-7 Constable Maan Chand are formal witnesses, who tendered in evidence their affidavits Ex.PH and PJ respectively. PW- 8 SI Raminder Singh deposed regarding conducting of partly investigation in this case, preparing of rough site plan and also regarding registration of FIR Ex.PK. PW-9 ASI Yogesh Kumar mainly deposed regarding recording the statement of complainant and his endorsement on the statement, which was sent to the Police Station and daily diary report Ex.PM was recorded. He sent the dead body of Amarjit Kaur for getting post-mortem examination done.
At the close of prosecution evidence, the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and were confronted with the evidence of the prosecution but they denied the correctness of the evidence and pleaded themselves as innocent. Accused-Kulwant Singh son of Karam Singh deposed that complainant-Kulwant Singh PW-3 is addicted to drinking and he had sold his entire landed property on that account. They had to pay `35,000/- as marriage expenses on the occasion of marriage of Amarjit Kaur with him. Kulwant Singh-complainant also demanded `20,000/- from them on the marriage occasion of his daughter Jaswinder Kaur, which they refused and on that account their relations became strained and they did not attend that marriage. His wife (since deceased) had also moved an application before the Police that she Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [5] apprehended danger to her life at the hands of her father, who was addicted to drinking and on occasions had demanded money from him and his daughter. Complainant-Kulwant Singh PW-3 visited their house one day prior to the present occurrence and had abused Amarjit Kaur that she was defaming him and also gave her beating. Being frustrated, she took some poisonous substance. They removed her to the hospital. When Kulwant Singh came to the hospital, he told him regarding the tragedy, but in connivance with the Police to save his own skin, he falsely involved them in the present case.
In defence the accused-appellants examined DW-1 Avtar Singh, who is Sarpanch of the village. He mainly deposed that during his tenure as Sarpanch, he never received any complaint from Amarjit Kaur or from her parents regarding maltreatment with her by her in-laws and Amarjit Kaur used to live in her in-laws house happily. He also stated that accused Kulwant Singh and Darshan Singh live separately and have separate cultivation.
After going through the evidence and material on record, the learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants as stated above.
At the time of arguments, learned senior counsel for the appellants argued that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The defence version is more probable. Accused-appellants Kulwant Singh and Darshan Singh are residing separately. Therefore, there is no abetment by Darshan Singh and his wife Charanjit Kaur. Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [6] Learned senior counsel further argued that the cause for suicide is stated to be abetment by the accused for not agreeing to marry Jaswinder Kaur with the son of Darshan Singh but Jaswinder Kaur was already married some where about one month before the occurrence. He further argued that Amarjit Kaur was got admitted in the Hospital by Charanjit Kaur as per medical record and even the complainant has stated that Kulwant Singh and Charanjit Kaur had got her admitted in the hospital. Therefore, he argued that a reasonable doubt exists in the present case and the appellants should be acquitted accordingly and the appeal be accepted.
On the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State argued that case of the prosecution has been duly proved by the PWs. The PWs have consistently deposed regarding the prosecution version. Their version has been supported and corroborated by medical evidence and investigation of the case. Amarjit Kaur died in the matrimonial house due to poisoning. It is for the accused to explain under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 as to how and why she died but there is no explanation by the appellants to explain the death of Amarjit Kaur. The learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab also argued that there was abetment and harassment by the accused to Amarjit Kaur due to which she was compelled to commit suicide.
Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [7] I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State and with their assistance have gone through the evidence on record minutely and carefully.
From the evidence on record, I find that the complainant PW- 3 Kulwant Singh and PW-4 Surjit Kaur mother of the deceased have consistently deposed as per prosecution version. There is nothing on the record as to why these PWs would falsely depose against the appellants. The defence version that complainant demanded `20,000/- at the time of marriage of Jaswinder Kaur from appellant Kulwant Singh cannot be believed. Though it is in the evidence that some of the land had been sold by the complainant and he was only having one acre of land but there is no cogent evidence on record to show that `20,000/- had been demanded at the time of marriage of Jaswinder Kaur from Kulwant Singh-appellant or from Amarjit Kaur. There is no witness examined in defence to support and corroborate this defence version. The occurrence took place in the matrimonial house of deceased Amarjit Kaur. She died due to consuming poisonous substance. All these facts are in the specific knowledge of the appellant-Kulwant Singh and as per Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the facts, which are especially within the knowledge of a person are to be proved by him. There is no explanation from appellant Kulwant Singh as to why she committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance especially when the marriage took place 8/9 years earlier and she has three male children. Both the PWs complainant-Kulwant Singh Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [8] and also mother of the deceased, namely, Surjit Kaur, have deposed that Kulwant Singh-appellant had demanded the hand of their daughter Jaswinder Kaur for Laddi son of Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur appellants-accused but they refused. On this, appellant-Kulwant Singh along with other accused-appellants started harassing Amarjit Kaur. A perusal of the evidence on record shows that Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur are residing separately. Both these appellants were also found innocent during the investigation of the case and they have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial. There is no cogent evidence on record to prove that Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur also harassed Amarjit Kaur. Rather, it is in the statement of the doctor that Charanjit Kaur got admitted Amarjit Kaur in the hospital. If Charanjit Kaur had abetted the commission of suicide by Amarjit Kaur, then there was no reason for Charanjit Kaur to get Amarjit Kaur admitted in the hospital and to make attempt to save her life. It is also in the evidence that Kulwant Singh and Amarjit Kaur had not attended the marriage of Jaswinder Kaur real sister of Amarjit Kaur, which was performed about one month earlier to the occurrence. This fact also shows the conduct of Kulwant Singh that he was harassing Amarjit Kaur on the ground that Jaswinder Kaur was not married with Laddi son of Darshan Singh. Otherwise also, presumption under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act also applies against accused Kulwant Singh but there is no cogent evidence or explanation on record to prove as to why Amarjit Kaur committed suicide. The defence version, as already discussed, is not Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [9] believable.
As regards, appellants Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur, there is no cogent evidence on record to prove their involvement or to prove the abetment by them to Amarjit Kaur to commit suicide. Therefore, a reasonable doubt exists regarding the involvement of Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur in the commission of offence and the benefit of doubt is to go to the accused. By giving the benefit of doubt to accused-appellants No.2 and 3 Darshan Singh and Charanjit Kaur, I acquit them of the charge as framed against them. Therefore, the appeal qua them is allowed and the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence recorded by the learned trial Court qua them are set aside. As the appellants No.2 and 3 are stated to be on bail, their bail/surety bonds stand discharged.
As regards, appellant No.1 Kulwant Singh, the prosecution has duly proved its case by leading cogent evidence against him. Therefore, I find no merit in the appeal qua him. Hence, the appeal qua Kulwant Singh appellant No.1 is dismissed.
The sentence of appellant No.1 Kulwant Singh was suspended by this Court vide order dated 15.11.2002 and he was released on bail during the pendency of the appeal. As he is on bail, his bail/surety bonds stand cancelled. He is directed to surrender himself before the jail authorities immediately for completing remainder of sentence, failing which the concerned authority shall proceed against him in accordance with law.
Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Appeal No.S-1328-SB of 2001(O&M) [10] September 11, 2013. (Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* Parmar Harpal Singh 2013.09.16 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh