Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rijwan & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 12 July, 2016
CRM No. 4934 of 2016 in
CRA-D No. 1904-DB of 2014 -1-
***
Rijwan and others vs. State of Haryana
***
Present: Mr. Shiva Khurmi, Advocate
for the applicant-appellant No. 2 - Usman.
Mr. Randhir Singh, Additional AG, Haryana.
*** Learned counsel for the State has filed an affidavit of Sh. Ashok Kumar, Deputy Superintendent, District Prison, Karnal, mentioning the period of imprisonment undergone by Usman (applicant - appellant No. 2). The same is taken on record.
Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
Criminal miscellaneous application has been filed seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment of Usman (applicant - appellant No. 2) during the pendency of appeal.
FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Israr (PW4). He submitted an application (Ex. P-9) inter alia stating that his elder sister Samar Jahan (deceased in the case) was married to Usman (applicant-appellant No.2). Samar Jahan was 25 years of age. From the marriage between Samar Jahan and Usman (applicant-appellant No.2), they had two children and one of them had died. The elder son namely Farman is alive. According to the complainant, Israr (PW4) immediately after marriage the in-laws of Samar Jahan started harassing her. The matter was compromised in the Panchayat of their community. Israr (PW4) had pacified the in-
1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 15-07-2016 00:14:03 ::: CRM No. 4934 of 2016 in CRA-D No. 1904-DB of 2014 -2- laws of Samar Jahan. They also fulfilled the demands of in-laws of Samar Jahan. However, the in-laws of Samar Jahan did not mend themselves. Rashid an uncle (Mausa) of Israr (PW4) on 06.11.2012 informed him on telephone that his sister Samar Jahan had died. In fact, Samar Jahan 2-4 days earlier to 06.11.2012 had informed Israr (PW4) on telephone that she was being harassed for dowry. Israr (PW4), however, did not take the telephone call seriously. He had full suspicion that Samar Jahan had been murdered by Usman (applicant-appellant No.2), her father-in-law, her brother in law Rijwan (appellant No.1) and her mother in law Jubeda (appellant No.3) in connection with demand for dowry. The sentence of imprisonment of Rijwan has been suspended by this Court vide order dated 20.04.2015. Besides, the sentence of imprisonment of Jubeda (appellant No. 3) has been suspended by this Court vide order dated 29.06.2015.
According to the affidavit that has been filed in Court today, applicant/appellant No. 2-Usman has undergone actual imprisonment of three years, eight months and six days as on 11.07.2016 out of sentence of 14 years rigorous imprisonment imposed on him for the offence under Section 304-B IPC.
It may be noticed that Mohd. Sabir (DW1), who is the father of Samar Jahan (deceased) in his deposition stated that the accused Usman or his family member never demanded any dowry or other articles at the time of marriage or after it. Besides, there is no custom of giving dowry in Muslim Hazam religion. Mohd. Sabir 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 15-07-2016 00:14:05 ::: CRM No. 4934 of 2016 in CRA-D No. 1904-DB of 2014 -3- (DW4) stated that he had old family relationship with the family of Usman. Mustkim, son of the said witness Mohd. Sabir was married to Usman's sister namely Salma 15 years ago. It is stated that Samar Jahan was suffering from epilepsy and used to remain unconscious under fits. She could not breathe properly due to the said disease. Huge amount had been spent on her treatment but she could not recover. It is stated that she died due to that disease.
Naseem (DW2) another witness deposed that Samar Jahan was daughter of Mohd. Sabir (DW1). He (Naseem - DW2) was the cousin of Mohd. Sabir (DW1). They were living in the same locality. It is stated that at the time of marriage of Samar Jahan, the accused never raised any demand of dowry and no dowry was given by her parents at that time. After marriage also, no demand of dowry was raised by them. Mustkim, son of brother of the said witness was married to sister of Usman.
The effect of said evidence, would require consideration at the time of final hearing of the appeal.
It may be noticed that Dr. Ashish Tyagi (PW-7), who conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Samar Jahan has stated that the cause of death was because of asphyxia due to constricting force around the neck. The said opinion also is not clear as to whether the death was homicidal or suicidal. In the absence of demand of dowry, the same would also require consideration. The appeal is not likely to mature for hearing in the near future.
3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 15-07-2016 00:14:05 ::: CRM No. 4934 of 2016 in CRA-D No. 1904-DB of 2014 -4- In the facts and circumstances, it would be just and expedient to suspend the sentence of imprisonment of Usman (applicant-appellant No. 2), during the pendency of appeal.
Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous application is allowed and the sentence of imprisonment of Usman (applicant- appellant No. 2) during the pendency of appeal shall remain suspended subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat.
(S.S. Saron)
Judge
(Lisa Gill)
July 12, 2016 Judge
rts
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 15-07-2016 00:14:05 :::