Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bijender Singh And Others vs State Of Haryana on 6 September, 2013
Author: K.C. Puri
Bench: K.C. Puri
Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 (O&M)
Date of decision : 6.9.2013
...
Bijender Singh and others
................Appellants
vs.
State of Haryana
.................Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri
Present: Sh. Sanjay Vashisht, Advocate
for the appellants.
Sh. Amit Kaushik, Senior DAG, Haryana.
...
K.C. Puri, J.
This is an appeal directed by the accused - appellants against the judgment and order dated 5/6.5.2003 passed by Sh. R.C. Bansal, Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, vide which they have been convicted under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment and fine as given below:-
u/s 304-B IPC Each convict to undergo RI for a period of 7 years and to pay fine of `1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for six months. Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -2- u/s 498-A IPC Each convict to undergo RI for a period of 2 years and to pay fine of `1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 6 months.
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The case of the prosecution as enumerated from the record is that on 8.8.2000 Incharge Police Post PGI M.S. Rohtak sent a wireless message regarding death of Sunil w/o Bijender r/o Santaur, whereupon ASI Chhotu Ram alongwith Constable Ashok Kumar went to PGIMS Rohtak. Ruqqa was collected from the police post and dead body of Sunil was received. Near the dead body Sanjay, brother of the deceased, his father Manphool and his uncle's son Shish Ram were present. Statement of Sanjay was recorded, in which he has stated that his sister deceased Sunil was married to Bijender s/o Daryao Singh, r/o Santaur on 30.5.1996. In her marriage they had given dowry according to their capacity but for the last six months his sister Sunil was being tortured by her husband - Bijender, her brother- in-law (Jeth) Surender and her mother-in-law Santro. This was disclosed by his sister Sunil whenever she used to visit their house. To sort out the matter, the complainant, his father Manphool and uncle's son Shish Ram went to village Santaur and persuaded the accused's family. A Panchayat was convened wherein it was decided that henceforth Sunil will not be treated with cruelty. It was further stated that after some time Bijender, Surender and Santro again started teasing and sent his sister for bringing more dowry such as Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -3- cooler, fridge from her house. The complainant and his father sent Sunil back in village Santaur and told her-in-laws that their demands would be met after harvest season. Thereafter, they again started teasing Sunil. In the year 1998 Sunil gave birth to a girl child in her parental house and thereafter with the intervention of Panchayat after six months they again left Sunil in village Santaur but the accused continued in their pursuits. On 7.8.2000 they received message from Sunil that she should be brought to Charkhi or alternatively cooler, fridge be given to her-in-laws. Whereupon the complainant and his father Manphool and his cousin Shish Ram went to village Santaur. There Sunil started weeping and told them either to take her to her parental house otherwise the accused would kill her. The complainant persuaded the deceased. At that time marks of injuries were visible on her face. On 9.8.2000 when they were in their village then message of death of his sister Sunil was received. Thereafter on receiving information, they came to PGI Rohtak where they found deceased Sunil lying dead due to burn injuries. Complainant alleged that they suspected that her husband Bijender, Jeth Surender and mother-in-law Santro killed the deceased by burning her. On the statement made by the complainant, formal FIR was registered. During investigation statements of the witnesses were recorded. Dead body was sent for the post mortem examination. After investigation case was sent up for trial of only two accused, namely Bijender and Santro. Accused Surender was found innocent and he was not challaned.
Charge under Sections 304-B and 498A IPC was framed Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -4- against the accused Bijender and Santro, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
The prosecution moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning of third accused Surender. After considering the application accused Surender was summoned to face trial for the abovesaid offences.
Fresh charge sheet under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC was framed against all the three accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
The prosecution, in order to bring home guilt of the accused examined PW-1 Satyavir Singh, Draftsman PW-2 Head Constable Ashok Kumar, PW-3 Constable Ram Niwas, PW-4 Sanjay complainant, PW-5 Shish Ram, PW-6 Dr. Narender Singh, PW-7 ASI Chhoto Ram, Investigating Officer and closed the prosecution evidence.
The accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and all the incriminating evidence was put to them, to which they denied. They admitted that deceased Sunil was married with accused Bijender. However, they denied the allegations that they had burnt the deceased or they ever harassed the deceased or treated her with cruelty on account of demand of dowry. They took the plea that deceased Sunil was having illicit relations with Ram Partap, sister's husband of Shish Ram and when she was seen by Laxmi wife of Surender in a compromising position with said Ram Partap during the night intervening 7/8.8.2000 on that account, she was snubbed by Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -5- Laxmi. Later on Sunil committed suicide out of shame. It was alleged that the case was false and the deceased alongwith her husband was living separately from other co-accused.
The accused were called upon to lead their defence evidence and they examined DW-1 Laxmi, wife of accused Surender and closed the defence evidence.
Learned trial Court after appraisal of the evidence, found the accused guilty under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment and fine as narrated above.
Feeling dissatisfied with the abovesaid judgment and order dated 5/6.5.2003 passed by Sh. R.C. Bansal, Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, the accused appellants have preferred the present appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that accused Surender has been declared innocent. Even the Investigating Officer has admitted that he is living separately. Accused Santro has given her age as 71 years as on 1.1.1994 and in this manner, she is now aged about 90 years. Even according to her statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. she is above 82 years. It is submitted that there are general allegations against Surender and Santro regarding demand of dowry. The allegations are that fridge and cooler were demanded. At such advance age Santro would not be benefited by the demand of fridge and cooler.
So, for as accused Surender is concerned, he is a married person and he could have made demand of cooler and fridge from his wife and not from the wife of his brother i.e. deceased. It is Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -6- submitted that there is a tendency to rope in all the family members. It is further contended that appellant Surender has already undergone incarceration for a period of 1 year, 6 months and 19 days and appellant Santro has also already undergone incarceration for a period of 1 year, 8 months and 23 days, as per their conviction slip. So, prayer has been made for their acquittal under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC.
Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer. It is submitted that all the ingredients of offence under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC are made out against these two appellants. So prayer has been made for dismissal of the appeal.
I have considered the submissions made by counsel for both the sides and have also gone through the record of the case.
During the course of arguments photostat copy of the voter card issued by the Election Commission of India, of Santro has been placed on the file. As per said photocopy the age of Santro was 71 years as on 1.1.1994. So, at the time of commission of offence, she was of 76 years. Even in the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., her age has been mentioned as 71 years. At such advance age she would not have been benefited by the demand of cooler and fridge.
Accused Surender has been declared innocent. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has admitted that he is living separately. He would also have not been benefited by the demand of cooler and fridge. Otherwise also no specific act of demand of dowry, soon before death has been mentioned against Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -7- these two appellants Santro and Surender.
After the death of bride in the matrimonial house, the family members lost love with in-laws of the bride. In some of the cases, they involve all the family members. So, the Court has to take out the grain out of the chaff. No specific act has been mentioned in respect of demand of fridge and cooler soon before death, against these two appellants. Consequently, their appeal stands accepted. The judgment and order dated 5/6.5.2003 qua Surender and Santro stands set aside and they stand acquitted by giving them the benefit of doubt.
So, far as accused Bijender is concerned, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that ingredients of offence under Section 304-B IPC are also not made out against him. It is submitted that DW-1 Laxmi has stated that Sunil deceased was found in compromising position with Ram Partap and that fact has come to the notice of Laxmi and out of shame Sunil had committed suicide by putting kerosene oil on her.
I have carefully considered the said submission but do not find any force in that submission.
The story of Sunil having been found in compromising position with Ram Partap does not find favour with the trial Court. On re-appreciation of statement of Laxmi, the said fact is not borne out, except bald statement made by her. She is an interested witness and want to save her husband and other family members. So, her testimony has been rightly discarded by the trial Court. No complaint regarding illicit relations of Sunil was made in writing or verbally to Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl.A. No.S-1037 SB of 2003 -8- any one prior to the death of Sunil. So, the said story has been propounded just to save the accused from legal punishment. The demand by Bijender in respect of cooler and fridge is duly proved. Soon before death of Sunil i.e. on 7.8.2000 such demand was made by appellant Bijender. Otherwise also, he being the husband has to explain under what circumstances Sunil has committed suicide in the matrimonial house. So, the presumption under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act, is also available against him.
No other point has been urged before me.
Consequently, the appeal preferred by appellant-Bijender is without any merit and the same stands dismissed. The appellant No.1 Bijender Singh is stated to be on bail. He be taken into custody to undergo his remaining part of sentence.
A copy of the judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance.
( K.C. Puri ) 6.9.2013 Judge chugh Chugh Banita 2013.09.18 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document