Delhi District Court
State vs . Bhagwan Singh Page No. 1 on 31 March, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SH.ATUL KUMAR GARG, ASJ - 03,
(CENTRAL) TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI
SC No. 16/15
State
... Complainant
Versus
Bhagwan Singh
S/o Sh. Partap Singh
R/o Vill. Myali Chaksen
PO ODA Dhar, PS Ghanshyali,
Tehiri Garwal, Uttrakhand.
... Accused
FIR No. : 204/15
PS : Prasad Nagar
U/S : 498A/304B/306 IPC
Date of institution : 04.06.2015
Date of arguments : 31.03.2016
Date of Decision : 31.03.2016
JUDGMENT
1. Oddities of human behavior in dealing with brides with motive of gratifying lust for dowry or otherwise led the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 1 legislature to coin an offence of cruelty to a married woman by her husband and/or her inlaws. But, it is not harassment per se or every type of cruelty that would attract the legal sanction. The connotation "cruelty" has been given a new dimension different than that given by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Explanation appended to Sec. 498A of the Penal Code defines cruelty thus "Cruelty mean: Any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman, or
(b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coerce her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demands."
Clause (a) of the above referred explanation makes willful FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 2 conduct punishable. The phrase "willful conduct" is not capable of precise definition. Willful is an act being spontaneous or arising out of free will. The human ingenuity is such that several forms could be devised to drive a married woman to extremity of putting an end to her precious life. The conjugal society and marital homes are intractable terrain to others and exclusive domain to husband and accessible habitation to his relations. From crude physical injury or harm to subtle devices with intellectual arrogance would be employed in causing cruelty or harassment to a married woman. Clause (b) encompasses harassment if it is with a view to coerce the woman or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security, on account of failure of any person related to her to meet such demand. Gravity of willful conduct is reflected by wordings of clause (a) and nexus of harassment to coerce the woman or any person related to her with a view to force to FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 3 meet unlawful demand, has been detailed in clause (b) of the above explanation. No doubt is left that physical or mental harassment to a woman by her husband and/or inlaws would be well covered under the provision of section 498A of the Penal Code. But minor differences between the wife and her husband would not fall within the mischief of this Penal provision.
2. Could prosecution establish that such cruelty was perpetrated to Anjali @ Geeta? For an answer facts are to be considered. As borne out of report under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code) vide DD No. 12A dated 5.3.2015, police was informed about committing suicide by a lady at E60/148890, 5th Floor. The above said information was assigned to SI Brij Pal Singh. SI Brij Pal reached to the spot alongwith Ct. Vinay. Gate of the room was opened. In the room, one lady was found hanging with the help of Dupatta from the ceiling fan. On enquiry, SI FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 4 Brij Pal came to know that the name of the deceased as Laxmi and her marriage was not lasted for seven years. SI Brij Pal informed the SHO, who thereafter informed the SDM. Crime team was called. Vikram Singh, father of the deceased was informed. Crime team inspected the spot and taken the photographs. Ear rings, hairs pins, mobile phone and plass were taken into possession. On the instructions of SHO, dead body was taken down and sent to LNJP Hospital. Doctor had mentioned on the MLC as brought dead. Doctor had also handed over two sealed pulandas having clothes of deceased and sample seal. Dead body was sent to mortuary. On 6.3.2015, statement of Vikram Singh was recorded by the SDM. In his statement, Vikram Singh has stated that he has been residing at Village Malya Kot, Distt. Tehri Garhwal, Uttrakhand. He had solemnized the marriage of his daughter with the accused on 6.5.2009 as per Hindu rites and customs. His son in law did the job in a hotel at Karol Bagh. Since FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 5 marriage, his son in law had harassed his daughter. He had given to his daughter, bed, Sofa, Chairs, one colour TV, one Godrej Almirah in the marriage. Inspite of this, the son in law had harassed his daughter for not bringing sufficient dowry. For the last two years, her son in law started beating his daughter under intoxication. His daughter has two sons. He had also counselled his son in law. On 4.3.2005 at 9.10 p.m., his wife had received a telephonic call from his daughter, who had apprised him that his son in law had beaten his daughter badly. She had asked him to rescue her daughter otherwise accused will not leave her alive. He immediately informed his relatives, namely, Surender Singh and Upender Singh residing in Delhi. They assured him to visit on the next morning. On 5.3.2015, his sonin law had informed him about hanging of his daughter. The above said information was endorsed by the police and got registered a case. During the course of investigation, police collected the evidence, FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 6 recorded the statement of witnesses and arrested the accused. After completion of investigation, police filed the charge sheet in the court.
3. After being heard, vide order dated 1.7.2015, accused was charged for the offence punishable under Section 498A as well as 304B IPC. Alternatively, he was charged for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC.
4. In order to substantiate the charge, prosecution has relied upon as many as twenty two witnesses, namely, Vikram Singh, Arvind Singh, Surender Singh, Upender Singh, HC Brij Mohan, SI Brij Pal, Ct. Krishan Pal, Suresh, Rakesh, Ct. Parveen Kumar, Ct. Vinay, SI Dhan Singh, Smt. Bhuddi Devi, Ct. Ajay Sharma, Chandra Shekhar, Dr. Rukmya, Dr. Rishi Solanki, Chander Shekhar, Pradeep Singh, HC Bhuvan Chand, HC Udai Partap and SI Mariamma. In fact, the prosecution had examined twenty one witnesses in all.
5. Prosecution evidence consists of three set of evidence. FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 7
First set of evidence consists of oral testimonies of Suresh Kumar, Arvind Singh Rawat, Surender Singh Rawat, Vikram Singh, Upender Singh Rawat, Rakesh Kumar Chakravorty and Smt. Buddhi Devi examined as PW1, PW5, PW6, Pw8, PW10, PW11 and PW18 respectively. Second set of evidence consists of testimonies of Dr. Ritu Saxena and Dr. Rishi Solanki examined as PW15 and PW21 respectively. Remaining evidence are of the police officials, who had carried out the investigation in the present case.
6. PW14 Ct. Parveen Kumar, being the operator at channel no.149 at Central Police Control Room had received an information about suicide by a lady by hanging. He had recorded this information and filled the requisite proforma in the computer and forwarded the same to Console Operator. He has brought the PCR form and proved the same as Ex.PW14/A. PW13 HC Brij Mohan being the duty officer had scribed the FIR and proved the same as Ex.PW13/A. FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 8
7. PW 3 SI Dhan Singh being the mobile crime team incharge of Central District had inspected the scene of crime on 05.03.2015 after receiving the information from the District Control Room. At the spot he found one lady was hanging on the ceiling hook with chunni. He also found the local police officer including SI Brij Pal. He inspected the scene of crime. He had proved his report as Ex. PW 3/A.
8. PW 4 Ct. Ajay being the photographer of the mobile crime team, Central DistrictI had taken photographs of the room. He had taken the total 23 photographs of the scene of crime and proved the negatives of the photographs collectively as Ex. PW 4/A1 to PW 4/A23.
9. PW 17 HC Bhuvan Singh was posted as MHC (M) on 05.03.2015. On that day, SI Brij Pal Singh had deposited the case property which he had deposited at serial no. 214/15/19. On 14.05.2015, SI Mariamma had taken the diary from the malkhana in order to place the same on FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 9 judicial record. He had also mentioned the above said fact at serial no. 214/15/19. He had proved the copy of the register as Ex. PW 17/A.
10. PW7 Ct. Vinay Singh & PW12 SI Brij Pal, being on emergency duty, went to the House No. E16/148890, 5th Floor, Bapa Nagar after receiving the information. He found the gate of the room opened having a curtain and in the room, the dead body of a lady was hanging with the hook of fan and on the folding bed a wooden stool was kept and on the floor, the personal belongings, jewellery of deceased were kept. On the slab between stove and water bottle, one small diary, pen, mobile phone were kept and on the third slab, one plass was kept. One ceiling fan was lying on the floor along with cut wires. PW 12 SI Brijpal Singh had enquired about the deceased Laxmi W/o Bhagwan Singh. He also came to know that the marriage of the deceased with the accused was not lasted for seven years, so SI Brij Pal had informed the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 10 SHO, SDM and crime team. All the articles lying there were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW7/A. The dead body was removed from the ceiling. On 07.03.2015, on the direction of the IO, PW 7 Ct. Vijay Singh went to Hotel Surya International, Saraswati Marg, Karol Bagh. He collected the record of attendance of the accused. Women SI Mariamma prepared site plan at his instance and same is Ex. PW 12/A in the presence of PW 12, the post mortem of the deceased was got conducted.
11. PW 9 Sh. Chandra Shekhar was the SDM, Karol Bagh on the date of the incident. On receiving the information at about 11.15 am from SHO Prasad Nagar about hanging of a married woman under seven years of her marriage, he visited the spot and found female was hanging with the ceiling fan. The name of the deceased was revealed as Vijay Laxmi W/o Bhagwan Singh. He further deposed that on the lower slab between stove and water bottle, a diary and a pen was kept FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 11 along with a mobile phone. On the second page of the diary suicide note was written. On the top slab, a plier was kept. The ceiling fan was kept on the tand. The body was removed from the hook and ligature duppatta was separated from the hook. SI Brij Pal along with crime team and other police officials was present there. The above said articles were taken into possession by the IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW 7/A and PW 7/B. The dead body was shifted to Mortuary of Lok Nayak Hospital. In the hospital, doctor handed over the ligature dupatta and clothes of deceased in sealed parcels to IO which were seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW 7/C and PW 7/D. On 06.03.2015, at about 2.00 pm, the father of deceased Sh. Vikram Singh came to his office where he got recorded his statement which as Ex. PW 8/A.
12. PW 20 Sh. Pradeep Singh was the Nodal Officer, Vodafone Services Ltd., Delhi. He deposed that on 18.3.2015, he had provided the CDR of mobile no.8859722556 and FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 12 9719294775 for the period from 01.12.2014 to 12.3.2015. He proved the CDR of mobile no. 8859722556 as Ex. PW 20/A. He had also produced the CAF of above said mobile connection and proved the copy of the same as Ex. PW 20/B and Ex. PW 20/C running into six pages. He had also produced the CAF of above said mobile connection and proved the copy of the same as Ex.PW20/D. On 27.03.2015, he had also sent CDR of mobile no.9999277507 for the period from 01.12.2014 to 05.03.2015 to SHO and proved the CDR as Ex. PW 20/H running into seven pages. He had also produced the CAF of above said mobile connection and proved the copy of the same as Ex. PW 20/I. As per record, this mobile number was issued to one Arvind Singh Rawat.
13. PW 16 SI Mariamma is the Investigating Officer of this case. She deposed that on 6.3.2015, she was posted as SI at PS Prasad Nagar. On that day, the investigation of this case was assigned to her. During the course of investigation, she FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 13 visited the spot. SI Brij Pal was called from police booth which was opposite to the spot. She prepared the site plan Ex. PW 12/A bearing her signatures at point B at the instance of SI Brij Pal. Accused Bhagwan Singh was found at the spot itself. He was brought to the PS where he was arrested vide arrest memo Ex. PW 2/A. The family members of deceased were also present in the PS. After getting the accused medically examined, he was lodged in the lockup. On the next day, she visited the spot and recorded the statement of the witnesses. She collected the attendance sheet of the accused from Hotel Surya International, where he was working. She took the photographs from crime team photographer. She collected the post mortem report and placed the same on the record.
14. PW 15 Dr. Ritu had identified the signature and handwriting of Dr. Rukaiya who had examined the deceased Laxmi in the LNJP Hospital. She had seen the MLC NO. FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 14 ECC003148 of the deceased and proved the same as Ex. PW 15/A bearing the signature of Dr. Sneh at point A. Dr. Rukaiya ws also working as CMO and was senior, so her name is also appearing on the MLC.
15. PW 21 Dr. Rishi Solanki is the autopsy surgeon on 07.03.2015 in Maulana Azad Medical College. On 07.03.2015, he conducted post mortem on the body of Vijay Laxmi w/o Bhagwan Singh. On external examination of the body, she found :
1. A Ligature Mark, 28 cm in length present on the front and both sides of neck (not completely encircling the neck). It was present in the form of pressure abrasion, brownish in colour, hard and parchmentised and was more prominent on front and right side of neck and was absent on the back of the neck. It had oblique deposition and was situated 5 cm below the chin in mid line, extending obliquely upwards on left side just below the angle of mandible and further 4 cm FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 15 below left mastoid process, then merging with the hair line. On the right side, it was 4 cm below angle of mandible and further upwards to lie 8 cm below mastoid process.
2. A bruise, blue in colour, of size 2cm x 1.5 cm was present on the left side of the face, 2cm below inferior orbital margin.
She further deposed that the cause of death was asphyxia consequent upon ante mortem hanging via ligature material. Injury no. 2 is caused by blunt force. All injuries are ante mortem nature and fresh in duration. She proved her report as Ex. PW 21/A bearing her signature at point A.
16. PW 1 Sh. Suresh Kumar was residing on the same premises i.e., E16/148890, Fifth Floor, Bapa Nagar, Delhi. The deceased Vijay Laxmi was residing in the house of his grand father, namely, Chet Ram (in distant relation) as tenant alongwith accused. She was residing on the same floor in half portion and the deceased was residing in a room of the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 16 other portion of that floor. Accused Bhagwan Singh was residing for last 1/1½ years. He had formal terms with accused Bhagwan Singh and he was not aware about family matters of accused Bhagwan Singh and his wife. On 5.3.2015, at about 10.15 a.m. one child residing in the same house namely Aman was shouting Pankha Phansi. After hearing the noise, he came out from his house and saw that the wife of accused Bhagwan Singh was hanged in the hook of fan. He immediately called 100 number from the mobile phone of his father. In the meantime, other neighborers gathered and after sometimes police came.
17. PW 5 Sh. Arvind Singh Rawat was residing at 2/55, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi. He deposed that deceased Vijay Laxmi was his cousin sister. He deposed that the marriage of Vijay Laxmi was solemnized with accused Bhagwan Singh on 06.05.2009 with Hindu customs and rites. His uncle had given all the customary items to the deceased FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 17 as Istridhan at the time of marriage. After marriage, Vijay Laxmi started residing along with accused in Bapa Nagar, Karol Bagh. Deceased Vijay Laxmi used to tell him on telephone that accused used to beat her after consuming liquor and she also used to complain that the accused was not satisfied with the articles given in the marriage. He tried to make the accused understand and visited the house of accused and requested the accused not to beat the deceased but accused did not mend his behavior towards the deceased. On 04.03.2015, at about 9.00 p.m. his uncle Vikram Singh Rawat made a call on his mobile which he could not attend. He informed his cousin Upender Singh Rawat that a quarrel was going on between accused and deceased Vijay Laxmi and she was beaten by the accused. Upender Singh Rawat informed him at about 9.30 p.m. in this regard. At about 10.45 p.m, he made a call to deceased Vijay Laxmi from his mobile phone and she told that she was beaten by the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 18 accused and she had sustained injuries in her hand. On 05.03.2015, he alongwith his cousin Upender and uncle Surender Singh Rawat left their house at about 11.00 a.m. for Bapa Nagar Karol Bagh and on the way they received a call from police that his cousin Vijay Laxmi has committed suicide by hanging herself.
18. PW 6 Surender Singh Rawat also deposed the fact that deceased was his niece and her marriage was solemnized with accused on 06.05.2009 as per Hindu rites and customs. The father of the deceased had given the istridhan articles according to his capacity. On 04.03.2015, Vikram Singh the father of deceased informed him on telephone at about 9.20 p.m. that accused had beaten Vijay Laxmi and he asked him to confirm this fact. Prior to that also accused had beaten deceased Vijay Laxmi on issue of money and his drinking habit. On 05.03.2015 at about 11.00 a.m. he along with his nephew Upender and Arvind left his house for the house of FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 19 accused and on the way, Arvind received a call from police that Vijay Laxmi has committed suicide by hanging herself.
19. PW 10 Upender Singh Rawat had also deposed about the fact that the the marriage of the deceased Vijay Laxmi was solemnized with accused Bhagwan Singh with Hindu custom and rites on 06.05.2009. At the time of marriage, his uncle had given sufficient articles of istridhan. After marriage Vijay Laxmi started residing in her matrimonial house at Bapa Nagar. On 4.05.2015 at about 11.00p.m. He had received a call from Vikaram Singh that some quarrel was going on with deceased Vijay Laxmi in her matrimonial home and they asked him to go to her matrimonial home on the next day in the morning. On 05.05.2015 at about 10.00 a.m. he along with his brother Arvind and uncle Surinder Singh Rawat left his house for the house of Vijay Laxmi and when they were on the way they received a call from police station that Vijay Laxmi had committed suicide.
FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 20
20. PW 8 Vikram Singh is an important witness. He is the father of the deceased. He got married his daughter Vijay Laxmi on 06.05.2009 with the accused Bhagwan Singh with Hindu customs and rites. Accused was working in some hotel at Karol Bagh. After marriage, accused started harassing his daughter. He had given bed, sofa, chairs, colour TV, godrej almirah etc. as istridhan to his daughter but accused used to harass his daughter for not bringing sufficient dowry. Accused used to beat his daughter after consuming liquor and he did not give money to his daughter for household affair. He visited the house of accused 23 times and counselled but accused did not change his behavior. On 04.03.2015, about 9.10 p.m. his daughter Vijay Laxmi informed him on telephone that accused had beaten her badly. He also talked to his daughter and she told him that she was beaten by the accused. He asked his relative Surender Singh and Upender, who reside in Delhi, to visit the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 21 house of his daughter Vijay Laxmi. On 05.03.2015 at about 11.45 a.m, he received a call from police that his daughter had committed suicide by hanging herself. Thereafter, he came to Delhi. On 06.03.2015, SDM had recorded his statement.
21. PW 18 Smt. Buddhi Devi was the mother of the deceased. She deposed that the marriage of her daughter Vijay Laxmi was solmenised with accused Bhagwan Singh. She had given all the customary items in the marriage. All the customery gold and silver items were given in the marriage. Her daughter remained with accused for one year in her village and then she came to Delhi along with accused. Normally accused used to keep her daughter well but as and when he used to consume liquor, he used to beat her. Accused used to provide money to his daughter for house hold expenses. A quarrel used to remain between her daughter and the accused but she did not tell her anything FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 22 about any quarrel prior to her death. In the evening nobody had come but she had told some of her relatives to go to the house of her daughter and see her but they could not go. On 05.03.2015, she received a call that her daughter Vijay Laxmi had committed suicide. Thereafter her husband went to Delhi.
22. In order to afford an opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing in evidence, accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Entire incriminating evidence was put to the accused. Accused claimed innocence and false implication. He deposed that he used to consume liquor occasionally. He could not give any reason as to why his wife committed suicide. However, occasionally she became angry and lost her temperament.
23. On behalf of State, ld. Addl. PP for the State had presented the fact and stated that from the testimonies of PW 5, PW 6 and PW 10, the prosecution is able to prove that the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 23 marriage of the deceased was solemnized on 06.05.2009 and the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself and they were informed on the previous day by the father of the deceased about a quarrel going on in the house of the accused. They also deposed that accused used to beat the deceased under intoxication and harassed her on demand of dowry. He further submitted that a suicide note was also recovered wherein the deceased had also mentioned that she had committed suicide because she cannot tolerate anything and she was very sad. Ld. Addl. PP further submitted that the PW 8 Vikram Singh had also deposed that accused used to harass his daughter for not bringing sufficient dowry. Accused used to beat her daughter after consuming liquor and he did not give money to his daughter for household expenses. PW 18 Smt. Buddhi Devi, the mother of the deceased had also stated the same fact. He submitted that from the above said evidence, the prosecution has proved its FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 24 case against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 498A/304B of IPC. Alternatively, he had claimed that it was the accused who is responsible for the death of the deceased as he had abeted her to take extreme step to end her life.
24. On the other hand, Ld. Amicus curiae Sh. Mrityunjya for the accused has stated that there is no evidence to connect the accused in the present case for the offence punishable under Section 498A/304B of IPC. He submits that it is not disputed fact that the deceased had committed suicide. However, he has said that no prosecution witness has said anything specific about the date when the demand of the dowry was made by the accused or whether the demand was complied. They all have stated in general that accused has harassed the deceased on account of demand of dowry. He further said that even the diary has not been sent to the FSL for comparison, so that it could be verified that the diary had FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 25 actually been written by the deceased herself. Moreover, if it is assumed that the diary has been written by the deceased, then also nothing has been mentioned against the accused. He further said that PW 16 SI Mariamma had admitted in cross examination that the deceased was high, hot tempered and pugnacious in nature and for that reason accused cannot be blamed upon her suicide. He further submitted that at the time of suicide, accused was not found at home, he was on duty as per PW 11. PW 11 Rakesh Kumar Chakraworty deposed that as per hotel record, accused had reported for his duty at 8.57 pm on 04.03.2015 and he remained on his duty till 9.30 am on the next day. Police was informed about the death on 05.03.2015. What had prompted the deceased for committing suicide, the accused is not aware.
25. I have heard the arguments at bar, perused the record and gone through the evidence brought and examined by the prosecution. From the testimony of PW 21, the prosecution FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 26 has proved the fact that the cause of death was asphyxia consequent upon ante mortem hanging via ligature material. Injury no. 2 is caused by blunt force. Besides the ligature mark of 28 cms in length present on the front and both sides of the neck, there was bruise, blue in colour of size 2 cm x 1.5 cm present on the left side of the face, 2 cm below inferior orbital margin. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased has committed suicide for the reason that she was being harassed on account of demand of dowry just soon before her death.
26. Herein, the accused has been charged for the offence punishable under Section 498A/304B IPC or alternatively under Section 306 IPC. Section 498A as well as 304B and 306 IPC are required to be reproduced herein : "498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 27 liable to fine."
"304B Dowry death - (1) 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.
(2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life."
Section 306 IPC.Abetment of suicide.If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
27. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused under Section 498A and 304B of IPC, the prosecution is required to prove that a woman was died either by burns or bodily injury or other than the normal circumstances within the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 28 seven years of her marriage. Besides proving the above said facts, the prosecution is required to prove the fact that soon before her death, she was subjected to harassment for demand of dowry. The first two ingredients has been proved by the prosecution. The marriage of the deceased was not lasted for the seven years with the accused when she committed suicide ie., her death has been occurred other than normal circumstances. Further the prosecution is required to prove herein that the deceased was harassed and subjected to cruelty on account of demand of dowry just soon before her death.
28. For this, the prosecution has examined PW 5 Arvind Singh Rawat, PW 10 Upender Singh Rawat, PW 16 SI Mariamma and PW 18 Smt. Buddhi Devi. None of the witnesses had given anything specific date and time when the demand of dowry has been raised just soon before her death. Not only this, they had not stated anything that on FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 29 which specific date, deceased had told that the accused had harassed her over the demand of dowry. PW 5, PW 6, PW 10 and PW 18 stated that they had given all the house hold articles in the marriage. They had said that her uncle had informed about a quarrel on 04.03.2015, but again it was only the quarrel not the beating had been given on account of demand of dowry.
29. PW 5 Arvind Singh Rawagt had admitted in his cross examination that the marriage ceremony of his cousin sister was performed at village Malyapr, District Tehri in a simple way. The accused was working in a hotel. He had admitted that there was no demand from the accused side at the time of marriage and whatever Istridhan was given to his cousin sister, was at the sweet will of his Tauji. He further admitted that cause for quarrel with the cousin sister was over consumption of liquor by the accused.
30. PW 6 Surender Singh Rawat did not know the reason FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 30 on which the quarrel used to remain between deceased and her husband. He had admitted that no quarrel had taken place between the accused and the deceased in his presence. Even the PW 8 Vikram Singh had also admitted that he did not state in his statement before the SDM that the accused used to demand dowry from his daughter and on this issue he used to beat his daughter.
31. PW 18 Smt. Buddhi Devi is the mother of the deceased. She also deposed that the accused never demanded dowry from them or from her daughter. She deposed that the accused used to provide money to her daughter for house hold expenses. She only deposed that quarrel used to remain between her daughter and accused on consumption of liquor.
32. If we assess the testimonies on the strength on the cross examination of these witnesses then it emerges out that the deceased was not harassed or subjected to cruelty by the accused on account of demand of dowry what to say just FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 31 soon before her death. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to connect the accused with the offence punishable under Section 498A and 304B of IPC. Accordingly, accused is acquitted from the above said charges.
33. Now come to the another angle, whether the accused has abeted the deceased to commit suicide. Section 306 IPC defines the offence of abatement of suicide. Language of this Section speaks the elements of abatement. It begun with the words 'If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine'. The offence of abatement has been defined in IPC in Section 107 IPC. Section 107 IPC defines the offence of abetement. Offence of abatement can be done by three ways; 'first, instigates any person to do that thing; Secondly, engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 32 thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; and thirdly, intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing'. Abetement involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding that person in doing of a things. More active role, which can be described as instigating or aiding the doing of a thing is required before a person can be said to be abeting the commission of offence under Section 306 IPC. Ingredients of abetement of suicide would be satisfied only if the suicide is committed by the deceased due to direct and alarming incitement by the accused leaving no option but to commit suicide.
34. Now look at the evidence of PW 3, PW 5, PW 6, PW 8 and PW 10. Again, all the witnesses had stated that quarrel had not taken in their presence. His deceased daughter had told them that the quarrel was erupted over consumption of liquor by the accused. Even, PW 8 Vikram Singh and PW 18 FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 33 Buddhi Devi also deposed the above said facts. The alleged diary recovered at the spot has not been sent to the FSL for examination, so that the comparison could be made that the alleged suicide note was written by the deceased herself. Even if the suicide note Ex. PW 7/A is taken true, then also the deceased has not blamed her death to anyone. She had stated anything in the suicide note that she was not on wrong side. Moreover, the IO PW 18 SI Mariamma had admitted in her cross examination that during enquiry, she came to know that the deceased was a quarrelsome, hot tempered, pugnacious in nature.
35. If we assess the above said facts emerged out in the testimonies of these witnesses, then also it cannot be said that suicide committed by the deceased was due to the direct abetement and incitement which left no option to the deceased but to commit suicide.
36. In view of the above detailed discussion, I am of the FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 34 view that the accused is acquitted from the above said charges. His bail bond and surety bond stand cancelled and discharged. However, he is directed to furnish the bail bond in terms of Section 437A of Cr.PC. File is consigned to record room.
Announced in open court On 31.03.2016 (ATUL KUMAR GARG) Addl. Sessions Judge03 (Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 35 FIR No. : 204/15 PS : Prasad Nagar State Vs. Bhagwan Singh 31.03.2016 Present : Sh. Alok Saxena, ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Accused is on bail.
Ld. Proxy Counsel Sh. Mrityunjay for Sh. Rajinder Chhabra, Ld. Amicus Curiae for the accused.
Arguments have been heard.
Vide my separate order, dictated and announced in the open court, accused is acquitted from the from the charge under Section 498A/304B or alternatively 306 of IPC. His bail bond and surety bond stand cancelled and discharged. However, he is directed to furnish the bail bond in terms of Section 437A of Cr.PC. File is consigned to record room.
(ATUL KUMAR GARG) Addl. Sessions Judge03 (Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
FIR No. 204/15 State Vs. Bhagwan Singh Page No. 36