Delhi District Court
State vs . 1. Vikas Kumar on 20 March, 2018
IN THE COURT OF SH. MUKESH KUMAR, ADDL. SESSIONS
JUDGE 04, (NORTHWEST DISTRICT) ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF :
Case No. 52125/2016
S.C. No: 112/01
FIR No: 606/2005
U/s : 406/498A/304 B/34 IPC
PS : Nangloi
STATE Vs. 1. Vikas Kumar
S/o Sh. Randhir Singh
R/o RZA37, PhaseV,
Prem Nagar, Najafgarh,
Delhi.
2. Jayawanti
W/o Sh. Randhir Singh
R/o RZA37, PhaseV,
Prem Nagar, Najafgarh,
Delhi. (Proceedings already
abated)
3. Swathi @ Savita
W/o Sh. Yogesh Kumar
R/o RZA37, PhaseV,
Prem Nagar, Najafgarh,
Delhi.
4. Yogesh Kumar
FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 1 of 69
S/o Sh. Randhir Singh
R/o RZA37, PhaseV,
Prem Nagar, Najafgarh,
Delhi.
Complainant:
Sh. Ved Prakash
S/o Sh. Daya Ram
R/o H. No. 400,
Village Mundka, Delhi.
Date of receipt of file in Sessions Court : 07.09.2005
Date of arguments : 12.02.2018
Date of judgment : 20.03.2018
J U D G M E N T:
1.By this judgment, I shall conclude the trial of the case FIR No. 606/2005 Police Station Nangloi registered against the accused person under Section 406/498A/304 B/34 IPC. The offences so committed are well within the cognizance of this Court wherein the accused is facing the trial.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that between 28.11.2004 to 13.06.2005, all the accused persons named above in furtherance of their common intention had harassed and subjected Ms. Bharti to cruelty by demanding FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 2 of 69 dowry and they have committed an offence punishable under Section 498 A/34 IPC and they also refused to return the dowry articles on demand of the complainant which were entrusted to the accused persons at the time of marriage, thereby they had committed an offence punishable under Section 406/34 IPC and on 14.06.2005 at House No. 400, Village Mundka, all the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention had demanded dowry from the deceased Bharti and she was subjected to cruelty soon before her death in connection with demand of dowry. As a result of harassment, the deceased Bharti committed suicide at her parental home. Bharti has died an unnatural death within seven years of her marriage and they all caused her dowry death and committed an offence punishable under Section 304B/34 IPC within the cognizance of this Court.
3. The present case was assigned to this Court after the committal of proceedings by the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate concerned to the Sessions Court. Before committal of the proceedings the compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C was made by Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate by supplying the complete set of charge sheet to the accused persons.
FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 3 of 69
4. Upon committal of the case, the Court of session and after hearing on charge prima facie a case under Section 406/498A/304 B/34 IPC is made out against the accused named above. The charges were framed accordingly which were read over and explained to all the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. Proceedings against the accused Jayawanti since died during the course of trial, has already been abated.
6. In support of its case the prosecution has examined as many as 25 witnesses to prove the case of prosecution.
7. Before coming to the testimonies of individual witnesses, the details of the witnesses examined by the prosecution and the documents proved by them are hereby put in a tabulated form as under :
Sr. No. PW No. Name of the witness Details of the witness
1. PW 1 W ASI Raj Bala Police witnessDuty Officer
2. PW 2 Sh. Ved Parkash Public witnesscomplainant
3. PW 3 Sh. Daya Ram Public witnessGrand father of deceased
4. PW 4 W ASI Savita Police witness
5. PW 5 Ct. Krishan Kumar Police witness FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 4 of 69
6. PW 6 Sh. Sant Ram Public witness
7. PW 7 Pandit Radhey Shyam Public witness
8. PW 8 Smt. Raj Dulari Public witnessmother of the deceased
9. PW 9 Dr. Manoj Dhingra MOIC Mortuary
10. PW 10 HC Virener Kumar Police witness
11. PW 11 Ct. Mahesh Anand Police witness
12. PW 12 Insp. Anil Kumar Police witnessI/c Mobile Crime Team
13. PW 13 HC Vijay Kumar Police witnessMember Crime Team
14. PW 14 Ct. Ashok Kumar Police witness
15. PW 15 Sh. Amar Nath Singh Official witnessNodal Officer IDEA Cellular Limited
16. PW 16 Pandit Antaryami Shastri Public witness
17. PW 17 HC Suraj Pal Police witnessDuty Officer
18. PW 18 Sh. C. Arvind Addl. CommissionerSDM
19. PW 19 Ct. Balbir Singh Police witness
20. PW 20 HC Jatinder Kumar Police witness
21. PW 21 Smt. Leelawati Public witness
22. PW 22 Sh. Vikas Vats Public witnessbrother of the deceased
23. PW 23 ASI Virender Kumar Police witnessMHC(M) FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 5 of 69
24. PW 24 SI Radhey Shyam Police witness
25. PW 25 Smt. Deepa Verma Deputy DirectorFSL List of documents :
Sr. No. Exhibit No. Details of documents Proved by
1. Ex.PW1/A Copy of FIR W ASI Raj Bala
2. Ex.PW2/A Statement of complainant before SDM Sh. Ved Prakash
3. Ex.PW2/B Arrest memo of accused Vikas
4. Ex.PW2/C Personal search of accused Vikas
5. Ex.PW2/D Identification statement recorded by SDM
6. Ex.PW2/X1 Diary
7. Ex.PW2/X2 Diary
8. Ex.PW2/X3 Diary
9. Ex.PW2/X4 Photocopy of answer sheet
10. Ex.PW2/X5 Seizure memo
11. Ex.PW2/X6 Seizure memo of car
12. Ex.PW2/X7 Seizure memo of dowry articles
13. Ex.PW2/X8 Seizure memo of marriage card
14. Ex.P1 Marriage card
15. Ex.P2 Suicide note FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 6 of 69
16. Ex.P3 Chunni
17. Ex.PW4/A Arrest memo of accused Swati WSI Savita
18. Ex.PW4/B Personal search memo of accused Swati
19. Ex.PW4/C Arrest memo of accused Jayawanti
20. Ex.PW4/D Personal search memo of accused Jayawanti
21. Ex.PW4/E Disclosure statement of accused Jayawanti
22. Ex.PW4/F Disclosure statement of accused Swati
23. Ex.PW5/A Seizure memo of suicide note Ct. Krishan Kumar
24. Ex.PW6/A Seizure memo Sh. Sant Ram
25. Ex.PW9/B Subsequent opinion Dr. Manoj Dhingra
26. Ex.PW10/A Sealed pullanda HC Virender Kumar
27. Ex.PW10/B Sealed pullanda
28. Ex.PW10/C Ex.PW10/A
29. Ex.PW10/D RC Register
30. Ex.PW11/A Order of DCP/PCR. Ct. Mahesh Anand
31. Ex.PW12/X Photographs Insp. Anil Kumar 1 to X7
32. Ex.PW12/A Seen of Crime Report
33. Ex.PW13/A Negatives HC Vijay Kumar FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 7 of 69 1 to 7
34. Ex.PW13/B Photographs 1 to B7
35. Ex.PW15/A Letter Amar Nath Singh
35. Ex.PW15/B ID Proof
36. Ex.PW17/A Rojnamcha HC Suraj Pal
37. Ex.PW18/A Endorsement on the statement C. Arvind
38. Ex.PW18/B Inquest proceedings
39. Ex.PW18/C Identification of dead body of deceased
40. Ex.PW18/D Request for conducting the post mortem on the dead body.
41. Ex.PW18/E Brief facts
42. Ex.PW18/F Request for performing autopsy
43. Ex.PW18/G Endorsement on the statement of Raj Dulari
44. Ex.PW20/A Arrest memo of accused Yogesh HC Jatinder Kumar Kumar
45. Ex.PW20/A Personal search memo of accused Yogesh Kumar
46. Ex.PW23/A Copy of register no. 19 ASI Virender Kumar
47. Ex.PW23/B Copy of register no. 19
48. Ex.PW23/C Acknowledgement of FSL
49. Ex.PW23/D Photocopy of RC FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 8 of 69
50. Ex.PW23/E Acknowledgement of FSL
51. Ex.PW24/A Site plan SI Radhey Shyam
52. Ex.PW24/B Seizure memo of Chunni
53. Ex.PW24/C Personal search memo of accused Jayawanti
54. Ex.PW24/D Arrest form of accused Vikas Sharma
55. Ex.PW24/E Arrest form of accused Jayawanti
56. Ex.PW24/F Arrest form of accused Swati
57. Ex.PW24/G Arrest form of accused Yogesh
58. Ex.PW25/A Opinion of FSL Smt. Deepa Verma
8. Before coming to the conclusion, the witnesses so examined by the prosecution can be categorized in the following manner which will help the Court to discuss the evidence of all the witnesses what they have deposed against the accused persons and in what manner the accused has been involved as per the story of prosecution.
9. Medical Evidence :
Dr. Manoj Dhingra has been examined as PW 9 who deposed on oath that he was deputed by the MS to identify the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Ashish Jain who had left the Hospital services and his whereabouts are not known. PW 9 FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 9 of 69 had seen the PM report No. 361/5 dated 14.06.2005 of one Bharti, 22 years old female D/o Ved Prakash. The body was brought by SDM C. Arvind with the alleged history of found in hanging condition on 14.06.2005 as per the brief history provided by the IO. On examination of the PM Report, he described the injuries as under :
External Injuries :
10. It is deposed that there appears oblically pressure abrasion mark present front and side of neck going upwards and backwards. On right side on the posterior hairline and on left upto angle of mandual 16 cm in length and 2 to 2.5 cm in width, 4 cm from right ear as well as from left ear lobes and 5 cm from chin. Skin at the legatural mark is half and parchmeneized. It is deposed that on the dissection subcutenious tissue beneath legetural mark is pale, white and glisting. Legetural material insitu. Cut open away from the knot and fix one slip note fix with the black tread and handed over to the accompanies Police Officers. Legetural material is lying over neck in front and hairs in between on back. OPINION :
The doctor has given the opinion on the injuries and FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 10 of 69 opined the cause of death as the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of construction force over neck structure subsequent to hanging. Time since death is 12 hour. Total inquest papers are
9. the PM Report is exhibited as Ex.PW9/A and he identified the signatures of Dr. Ashish Jain at point A. It is also submitted that as per the PM Report the legatural material was sealed and handed over to the Io along with the sample seal.
It is further submitted that on 09.07.2005, IO has submitted an application along with sealed parcel with a seal of AJ asking whether the hanging is possible with the legatural material i.e chunni recovered from body. After examining the material Dr. Ashish had opined that hanging is possible with the legtual material i.e Chunni. The material was resealed with the seal of AK and handed over to the accompanies Police Personnel. The subsequent opinion given by Dr. Ashish Jain is Ex.PW9/B. This witness has not been cross examined by Ld. defence counsel.
11. Forensic Evidence :
PW 25 is also examined by the prosecution from Forensic Department namely Dr. Deepa Verma, Deputy Director, FSL Rohini, Delhi who deposed on oath that on FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 11 of 69 29.07.2005 certain documents were received from SHO PS Nangloi, Delhi vide memo No. 553/SHO/NL dated 29.07.2005 related to FIR No. 606/2005 for examination and report in the laboratory which was marked to her. She deposed that the questioned document was a suicide note containing writing of the deceased and marked as Q1. The standard admitted writing Mark A1 to A48 of the deceased Bharti were also supplied for comparison.
After careful and through examination she gave her report no. FSL 2005/B 3046 dated 30.09.2005 which bears her signatures on point A on all the three pages vide Ex.PW25/A. It is deposed that as per the report her opinion is that "the person who wrote red enclosed writings stamped and marked as A1 to A48 also wrote the red enclosed writings similarly stamped and marked Q1". The reasons regarding her opinion is given in the report. She had also seen the document Q1 which is already Ex.P2 and the documents A1 and A2 are exhibited as Ex.PW2/X1. The documents A3 to A9 already Ex.PW2/X3, and the documents A10 to A27 already exhibited as Ex.PW2/X2 and the documents A28 to A48 are already exhibited as Ex.PW2/X4 and these are the same documents FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 12 of 69 which were examined by her which bears the stamp of the FSL office put by her at the time of examination. However in the cross examination it is admitted by the witness that the questioned documents were not received in the FSL office in sealed condition and the report regarding comparison was given on the basis of writings in the photocopies and documents A1 to 27 which were original writings.
12. Police witnesses :
Prosecution has also examined the Police witness who were formal in nature and who had participated in the investigation and in preparation of the documents. PW 1 W/ ASI Raj Bala who deposed that on 14.06.2005 she was posted at PS Nangloi as ASI and was working as Duty Officer from 09:00 AM to 05:00 PM. At about 11:25 AM, she received one application in the English language endorsed by SHO/Insp. Inshwar Singh through his Reader. On the basis of said endorsement, she recorded formal FIR No. 606/2005 under Section 498A/304 B IPC. After recorded the FIR, she sent the copy of FIR and original endorsement to Insp. Ishwar Singh. The FIR is Ex.PW1/A. FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 13 of 69
13. PW 4 W/SI Savita who deposed that on 29.07.2005 she was posted at PS Nangloi. On that day she along with Insp. Ishwar Singh, Addl. SHO PS Nangloi reached at Tis Hazari Courts in the Court of Ld. MM. Accused Swati and Jayawanti present in the Court had surrendered before the Ld. MM and with the permission of the Court both the said accused were arrested by her. The arrest memo of accused Swati is Ex.PW4/A and her personal search memo is Ex.PW4/B. The arrest memo of accused Jayawanti is Ex.PW4/C and her personal search memo is Ex.PW4/D. It is deposed that the IO obtained the Police remand of both the accused persons and they were brought to the Police Station under her custody. Both the accused persons interrogated where they made their disclosure statements vide Ex.PW4/E and Ex.PW4/F.
14. The next witness examined by the prosecution is PW 5 Ct. Krishan Kumar who deposed that 14.06.2005, he was posted at PS Nangloi and on that day he was on emergency duty between 08:00 Pm to 08:00 AM. He deposed that at about 07:00 AM a telephone was received in the Police Station and DD No. 42A was recorded. He along with ASI Radhey Shayam reached at Village Mundka on the basis of DD No. 42 A. They FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 14 of 69 reached at House no. 400, Village Mundka and they reached in a room which was on the first floor of the said house and they saw that a female was hanging with a hook with the help of chunni. ASI Radhey Shyam gave an information to the Senior officers and to the SDM. Thereafter SDM, SHO, photographer and Crime Team reached at the spot. The spot was inspected by the SDM and SHO. Photographs were taken by the photographer. Crime team also inspected the spot. The chunni was removed from the hook of the roof and the body of the female was brought down. On the direction of ASI Radhey Shyam, the mother of the deceased took search of the dead body and a suicide note was recovered from the Brassiere of the deceased. The suicide note was seized vide memo ex.PW5/A which bears his signatures at point A.. The suicide note was covered in a pullanda and sealed with the seal of RS and then it was sealed by preparing memo. After the inquest proceedings, the dead body was taken by him to the SGM Hospital. After the postmortem, the dead body was handed over to the relatives of the deceased. On the same day, during the evening hours he along with Insp. Inshwar Singh and ASI radhey Shyam reached at Najafgarh at House No. RZA37 and FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 15 of 69 on the pointing out of Sh. Ved Prakash accused Yogesh was apprehended. (Accused is correctly identified by the witness). His arrest memo is Ex.PW2/B and personal search memo is Ex.PW2/C and after examination he was kept in lockup.
15. Prosecution also examined PW 10 HC Virender Kumar who deposed that on 14.06.2005 he was posted as HC at PS Nangloi and was working as MHC(M) in the PS. One that day ASI radhey Shyam deposited one sealed pullanda with the seal of RS vide Sr. No. 5687. On the same day Addl. SHO Ishwar Singh also deposited three sealed pullandas out of which two were having the seal of AJ and third pullanda was bearing the seal of IS. The aforesaid pullandas were deposited vide Sr. no. 5687. The photocopy of the relevant entry is Ex.PW10/A. It is further deposed that on 27.06.2005 Addl. SHO Ishwar Singh deposited one sealed pullanda with the seal of IS along with Istridhan articles of the deceased Bharti as mentioned in the register no. 19 and one Maruti car No. DL 4C AA 2685. The said articles were deposited vide Sr. No. 5727 in the register no. 19 vide Ex.PW10/B. It is further deposed that on 29.07.2015 two sealed FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 16 of 69 pullandas with the seal of RS and IS along with two sample seals of the aforesaid seal impression were sent to FSL Rohini through Ct. Balbir vide Ex.PW10/C. It is further deposed on 22.09.2005 one envelope was also sent to FSL Rohini through Ct. Balbir along with one forwarding letter from the registrar MD University vide RC No. 391/21/05. The photocopy of the same is Ex.PW10/D. The witness also deposed that on 04.07.2005, the Istridhan articles and Maruti Car were released on superdari to the father of the deceased.
This witness also deposed that on 09.07.2005 Addl. SHO took one sealed pullanda with the seal of AJ from the Malkhana for expert opinion. On 12.07.2005 he deposited the sealed pullanda sealed with the seal of AJ in the Malkhana. It is also deposed that so long as the case property remained in his custody, it was not tempered by anyone.
This witness is also not cross examined by the Ld. Defence counsel.
16. PW 11 Ct. Mahesh Anand is also examined by the prosecution who deposed that on 13.06.2005 he was posted at Ct. at PCR (PHQ) in A shift. It is deposed that on that day his duty hours were 08:00 PM to 08:00AM. At around 06:50 AM he FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 17 of 69 received a call from land line number 28344144. However, the number so given by the witness in his examination in chief appears to be not correct as it is running in nine digits but the numbers as mentioned above is the correct number which is mentioned in PCR Form. Same is recorded above. The information is received to the effect that one lady by the name of Bharti resident of Village Mundka had committed suicide by hanging. The said information was recorded vide DD No. 42A Mark PW11/A and the record of the said call was already destroyed by the order of DCP PCR vide order no. 1434 36/HAR/PCR dated 15.10.2008 vide Ex.PW11/A. This witness is also not cross examined by the Ld. defence counsel. This witness was also recalled for further examination to prove the PCR Form vide Ex.PW11/X.
17. PW 12 is Insp. Anil Kumar who deposed that on 14.06.2005 he was working as SI and posted as I/C Mobile Crime Team, West District, Delhi. It is deposed that on that day on receipt of the information at his office through wireless, he along with his team consisting of photographer HC Vijay Kumar and Fingerprint Proficient HC Ranbir had gone to the spot i.e House no. 400 Village Mundka. One young lady aged about 22 FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 18 of 69 years, whose name was revealed as Bharti had hanged her self with the Duppata from the sealing. The inspection was commenced at about 08:30 PM and 7 photographs were clicked by the photographer. He has seen those 7 photographer placed on record file which reflects the place of occurrence. The photographs are Marked as Ex.PW12/X1 to X7. He further deposed that one suicide note, one duppata used in hanging, one plastic stool, slippers and broken bangles were found on the spot. He advised the IO to seized all these articles. He had seen the suicide note vide Ex.P2 which is correctly identified to be found on the spot. He prepared the crime scene report in his own handwriting vide Ex.PW12/A.
18. PW 13 HC Vijay Kumar as examined by the prosecution also deposed that on 14.06.2005, he was posted with the Mobile Crime Team, West District and he accompanied SI Anil Kumar Incharge Crime Team and supported the version of PW 12.
19. PW 14 Ct. Ashok Kumar who deposed that on 14.06.2005 he was posted at PS Nangloi and on that day he was on duty as Motorcycle Rider. At about 11:30 AM, Duty Officer called him in the Police Station and handed over the FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 19 of 69 Dak with direction to handover the same to the Senior Officials. The Dak containing the copy of FIR which was furnished to the Sr. Officers.
20. PW 17 HC Suraj Pal who deposed that in the intervening night of 13/14.06.2005 he was posted as HC in PS Nangloi and on that day he was performing the duty as Duty Officer. At about 07:05 AM, one call was received from control room that one married girl namely Bharti had hanged herself at Mundka Village. He recorded the DD entry and the same was assigned to ASI Radhey Shyam for necessary action who left the PS along with Ct. Krishan. They copy of FIR is Ex.PW17/A.
21. PW 19 Ct. Balbir was also examined by the prosecution who deposed that on 29.07.2005 he was posted at PS Nangloi as Motorcycle Rider and as per the direction of the IO he collected two pullandas sealed with the seal of IS and RS and also collected some documents from the IO and deposited the same with FSL vide RC No. 291/21/05. Thereafter Road Certificate was deposited with the MHC(M) and the pullandas were not tempered, till the time it remained in the custody. He also deposed that he also collected the FSL From the IO and deposited the same with the FSL.
FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 20 of 69
22. PW 20 HC Jatinder Kumar examined by the prosecution who deposed that on 27.06.2005 he was posted at PS Nangloi as Ct. On that day he joined the investigation of the case along with Insp. Inshwar Singh and they reached at House No. RZA37, PhaseV, Prem Nagar, Najafgarh, Delhi. The complainant of the case namely Ved Prakash was also with them, from the said house one Maruti car bearing registration No. DL 4C AA 2685, some gold jewelery and other dowry articles were seized by the IO on the identification of the complainant. The said articles were produced by the father of the accused Vikas. Seizure memo was prepared vide Ex.PW6/A, PW2/X7 and Ex.PW2/X6, all bearing his signatures at point B. It is further deposed that on 30.07.2005, he again joined the investigation of the present case along with Insp. Ishwar Singh. On that day, he was present in the PS. Accused produced the anticipatory bail order. IO interrogated him and formally arrested the accused Vikas and he was released on bail. The arrest memo and personal search memo of accused Yogesh are Ex.PW20/A and Ex.PW20/B.
23. Prosecution also examined PW 23 ASI Virender Kumar who deposed that on 14.06.2005, he was posted at PS FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 21 of 69 Nangloi as MHC(M). On that day ASI Radhey Shyam deposited one pullanda sealed with the seal of RS in Malkhana which was containing suicide note vide entry at Sr. No. 5687. On the same day Addl. SHO Nangloi also deposited one pullanda sealed with the seal of AJ and one sample seal of AJ which was containing the Chunni of the deceased. One pullanda sealed with the seal of IS was also deposited which was containing the diaries and same was deposited vide entry at Sr. No. 5687 in register no. 19.
Witness further deposed that on 27.06.2005, Insp. Inshwar Singh again deposited one sealed pullanda with the seal of IS which was containing Jewelery articles along with other dowry articles and one Maruti car which was deposited in the Malkhana vide entry 5727. This witness also corroborated the testimony of PW 10 and deposed all on the same lines.
24. Prosecution also examined PW 24 SI Radhey Shyam who participated the investigation since very beginning after receiving the DD entry on the date of incident i.e 14.06.2005 who deposed that after receiving the DD entry no. 42 A he along with Ct. Krishan Kumar reached at House No. 400 at Village Mundka. This witness has also deposed all on the FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 22 of 69 same lines what has been deposed by Ct. Krishan Kumar. PW 24 has been cross examined at length by Ld. Defence counsel.
25. The IO of the case could not be examined by the prosecution as it is reflected in the order sheet dated 06.09.2016 that Insp. Inshwar Singh has expired therefore only the first IO SI Radhey Shyam has been examined to prove the case of prosecution.
26. Official witnesses :
Prosecution has also examined Sh. C. Arvind, Addl. Commissioner, Trade and Tax Department, Delhi Government who was posted as SDM Punjabi Bagh at the relevant time in 2005. He deposed that on 14.06.2005, he was working as SDM. On that day he was informed by Addl. SHO Nangloi Insp. Ishwar Singh that a lady namely Bharti Wife of Vikas Sharma had committed suicide at her parental home situated at village Mundka. He requested to reach at the spot by stating that the death of deceased has taken place within seven years of her marriage. Thereafter, he along with his Reader went to the spot, where he found dead body of Bharti lying on the bed on the first floor of the said house. Parents and brother of the deceased were also present there. ASI Radhey Shyam who FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 23 of 69 was also present at the spot. The Crime Team also reached at the spot and inspected the place of occurrence and took the photographs of the dead body as well as of the spot from different angles. ASI Radhey Shyam had informed him that he had already seized the suicide note recovered from the spot by him. PW18 recorded the statement of father of the deceased Sh. Ved Prakash which is exhibited as Ex.PW2/A. The statement was read over to him and he signed the same at point A. The statement was recorded in the handwriting of PW 18 which bears his signatures at point B. He also made the endorsement on the said statement to register a case against all the accused under the relevant provisions of law. Endorsement is Ex.PW18/A. Thereafter the dead body was sent to the SGM Hospital, Mortuary to preserve the dead body. Thereafter he reached at the Mortuary at SGM Hospital and prepared the inquest proceedings vide Ex. PW18/B. The dead body was duly identified by the witnesses vide Ex.PW18/C. Thereafter he made request for conducting the post mortem on the dead body of deceased vide his application Ex.PW18/D. He also prepared the brief facts vide Ex.PW18/E. All exhibits are bearing his signatures. It is deposed that the post mortem FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 24 of 69 on the body of the deceased was conducted. He also requested to perform the autopsy on the dead body vide Ex.PW18/F. After the post mortem the dead body was handed over to the parents of the deceased. It is deposed that he also recorded the statement of Smt. Raj Dulari, mother of the deceased which is already Ex.PW18/A. Endorsement was also made on that statement for taking action as per law vide Ex.PW18/G. This witness was also cross examined at length by Ld. Defence counsel.
27. Prosecution also examined one Sh. Amarnath Singh, Nodal Officer, Idea Cellular Limited to produce the CDR of Mobile No. 9911110551 and IMEI No. 35390900014748. it is deposed that CDR of the said Mobile has been destroyed as per the DOT guidelines in licensing condition No. Sub Para 44.16 which provides that the CDR should be destroyed after the one year of the CDR has been recorded. To that effect he produce one letter issued by him on 13.02.2013 which bears his signatures at point A and the letter is Ex.PW15/A. He also deposed that in the present case SHO Nangloi has made request to the Manager Incharge of their company to provide call details of incoming as well as outgoing services of the FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 25 of 69 mobile no. 9911110551. He deposed that he can not tell what happens to the original application received from the Police officials. He was also summoned for further examination in chief on 05.05.2016, on that he brought the original documents of the mobile no. 9911110551 which was in the name of accused Yogesh Kumar S/o Randhir Kumar R/o Prem Nagar, Najafgarh, Delhi which was supported with the photocopy of ID and I card vide Ex.PW14/B. He also deposed that the CDRs could not be retrieved due to the lapse of time. In the cross examination this witness has deposed that IO of the case did not approach him for seizure of the CDRs or CAF of the aforesaid mobile number during the investigation of this case nor his statement was recorded by the IO.
28. Public witness/Family members of deceased :
The prosecution also examined the family members of the deceased and other public witnesses who are having some knowledge in connection of this case. The first witness examined by the prosecution from the family of the deceased is Sh. Ved Prakash father of the deceased who deposed. PW 2 deposed that deceased Bharti was his daughter who got FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 26 of 69 married with Vikas Sharma on 28.11.2004 as per Hindu rites and customs at their residence. It is deposed that when his daughter in first time visited at home after the marriage from her matrimonial home, she disclosed to her father and other family members that in the first night her husband told her that he got married with Bharti under compulsion of family members otherwise he is having a love affair with some other girl. His deceased daughter also disclosed that the dowry which was given to her and her in laws, they are not happy with the dowry particularly her husband, mother in law, Jeth and Jethani namely Swati. He also deposed that his deceased daughter also submitted that the Maruti 800 car is used to be given in the marriage even by a poor person. He also deposed that his daughter disclosed him that, now her husband and family members are demanding Santro Car and one lac rupees more from his daughter. He further deposed that his daughter disclose him that her Jeth and Jethani also asked that no gift was given to them in the marriage and they always used to taunt Bharti that something should have been brought as gift for them by Bharti. He also deposed that his daughter also told him that her husband Vikas told her that it will take 23 months FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 27 of 69 and 23 years to adjust with his daughter Bharti. PW2 further deposed that they tried to understand their daughter and sent her to the matrimonial home in the month of November, 2004. After one week, they received a telephone from their daughter that her in laws are compelling her to bring Santro Car as well as Rs. One lac from her parents. PW 2 further deposed that in the month of January, 2005 he along with his father Daya Ram went to the matrimonial house of Bharti and they tried to understand them to the effect, that they had already given much dowry in the marriage, now they are not in a position to give Santro car and Rs. One lac to them. It is deposed that, at that time the mother in law, Jeth and Jethani uttered that they have not given silver utensils in the marriage. It is further deposed that despite their great persuasion to understand, the accused person were still adamant for demand of Santro car and Rs. One lac.
In his deposition he further deposed that in the last week of February, 2005 accused Vikas left Bharti at their House on the pretext that if Santro car is not given to him he will not take their daughter with him. He also deposed that thereafter their daughter disclose them that accused started coming late in FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 28 of 69 night under the influence of liquor and he was in the habit to smoke costly cigarette and it was learnt that he was out of job. This witness further deposed that he made phone call to talk with the mother in law and Jeth of her daughter and asked them whether Vikas is not in service. He was advised to start a typewriting coaching center after withdrawing the amount from GPF account as his daughter is also qualified and is having Diploma in English Stenography. The mother in law and Jeth asked him to give rs. 45 lacs for their son and brother as he is qualified in a Computer but he refused their proposal. This witness further deposed that the mother in law and Jeth asked him to arrange such amount for the betterment of the future of his daughter otherwise they will keep their daughter as a maid servant.
It is deposed that during the lifetime of their daughter she was being harassed and taunted by her Jeth, Jethani and Mother in Law in the daily domestic work as well as for not bringing the jewelery for Jeth and Jethani and for not bringing Rs. One lac. It is also deposed that Jeth and Jethani also taunted the deceased that they are living on the earning of Jeth and Jethani. This witness further deposed that before the FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 29 of 69 occasion of Holi in the month of March, 2005 he makes a telephone call to the in law of his daughter to take back the Bharti at her matrimonial home. It is further deposed that near the date of 25/26.03.2005, accused Vikas husband of the deceased came to their house and took her back to the matrimonial home. Thereafter the family member of the deceased used to make telephone calls to their daughter and their daughter also used to make telephone calls to them also. The deceased used to tell that now their in laws are demanding Rs. 45 lacs. It is deposed that on 17.05.2005, Vikas brought his daughter Bharti at their home on the pretext that if they will not given Rs. 45 lacs along with Santro car they will not take her back. Even he has to wait for 45 years. It is further deposed that his daughter and the wife told him that one day his daughter saw her Jethani Swati with her husband in a compromising position to which the deceased was beaten mercilessly by them.
It is also deposed that their daughter informed that her mother in law uttered that time, that her husband Vikas and her Jethani Swati will remain like that and if she not wanted to see them again in the compromising position, then she will ask FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 30 of 69 her father to arrange a plot to live separately. Thereafter PW makes a telephone call and talk with father of accused Vikas, Randhir Singh and the whole incident was narrated to him. The father in law of his daughter told that their family members do not understand his command and he is ashamed of their act. The father in law also assured that he will try to ask his son to take Bharti at her matrimonial house. This witness further deposed that on 10.06.2005 he along with his wife Raj Dulari went to the matrimonial house of his daughter along with his daughter Bharti. Smt. Leelawati sister of PW 2 and Bua of the deceased Bharti also accompanied them as she was residing nearby the matrimonial house of their daughter. It is further deposed that at that time, they persuaded to make them understand that as well as they received the compensation amount of the land, they will give the same to them and asked them to keep their daughter at their house. The Jeth and Jethani of Bharti told them that they will not keep Bharti with them without receiving Rs. 45 lacs and Santro car. Perusal of record also reveals that the original statement before the SDM is running into four pages which was recorded in the handwriting of SDM concerned, but his FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 31 of 69 examination in chief recorded before the Court is running in 15 pages and thereafter he was cross examined by Ld. Defence counsel and the cross examination also recorded in around 15 pages. Finally in his examination in chief PW 2 deposed that they tried to make the accused persons to understand but they refused to keep the Bharti in their house, then finding no other alternate PW 2 brought back his daughter to their house. It is further deposed that on 13.06.2005, he along with his wife made several calls to the house of accused persons and tried to make them understand but they were still adamant of Rs. 45 lacs and Santro Car. At that time their daughter was also hearing the conversation took place between PW 2 and the in laws of the deceased. It is further deposed that at about 08:00 PM accused made telephone to their house which was received by Raj Dulari mother of the deceased, then they persuaded the accused Vikas to understand him on the phone but he was adamant for the demand of Rs. 34 lacs and Santro car, in a much dis respect way and this conversation was going on till around 10:30 PM. It is also deposed that they tried to pacify their daughter who started weeping. At that time Bharti was very upset and finally they went to sleep in the same room and FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 32 of 69 on the next morning on 14.06.2005, their daughter wake up and went to kitchen and prepare two cup of tea for them. Then she went upstairs on the roof on the pretext of going to washroom, at that time they were busy in having telephone calls with the in laws and other relatives. It is deposed that at about 06:40 AM, their son went to upstairs for toilet and he saw that their daughter Bharti was hanging, then he immediately raise the alarm and made cry. Police was informed. SDM Punjabi Bagh and Police also reached there. Statement of PW was recorded vide Ex.PW 2/A. It is also deposed by the witness that whatever was stated in the Court could not be explained by him before the SDM as there was a dead body of their daughter was hanging in their house.
He further deposed that Police inspected the site in his presence and thereafter he was called to SGM Hospital where he identifies the dead body of his daughter. He further deposed that on 14.06.2005 at about 06:00 PM, he was called by the SHO at the house of accused persons and at his instance accused Vikas was arrested vide memo Ex.PW2/B and personal search memo Ex.PW2/B, both bearing his signatures at point A. He further deposed that his identification FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 33 of 69 statement Ex.PW2/D was recorded by the SDM and his wife handed over the suicide note to the Police and from the spot one chunni and one stool was also seized by the Police. He further deposed that he produced three diaries to the police and in these diaries his daughter written something in Hindi and English language in her hand writing. PW 2 identify the handwriting and proved the diaries as Ex.PW2/X1, Ex.PW2/X2 and Ex.PW2/X3 and photocopy of answer sheet as Ex.PW2/X4. He further proved the seizure memo of diaries as Ex.PW2/X5. He further deposed that IO also took into possession Maruti Car No. DL 4C AA 2685 from the accused persons and proved the seizure memo of car as Ex.PW2/X6. He further deposed that IO also taken into possession from the house of the accused persons certain dowry articles given by him vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/X7. He further proved the marriage car as Ex.P1 and seizure memo of the marriage card as Ex.PW2/X8. He further proved the suicide note as Ex.P2 and deposed that the suicide note bears the handwriting of his daughter Bharti. The witness proved the chunni as Ex.P3.
He further deposed that he lastly talked with his daughter on 13.06.2005 and his daughter Bharti had talked on FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 34 of 69 phone with her husband at about 08:00/08:30 PM. He further deposed that when his daughter kept the receiver of the phone his daughter started weeping and when he inquired from her why she was weeping. His daughter told him that her husband told her on phone that, if, she will not bring Rs. 4 lacs and one Santro Car with her, her husband will not come to take her and she has to remain at her parents home. He further deposed that thereafter in the night they slept and in the morning they found her daughter hanging with the hook of the ceiling fan with the help of chunni. He further deposed that when his daughter was weeping soon before her death in the evening prior to it, he also talked with Vikas, his mother and his brother and requested them to take back his daughter to her matrimonial house and he also requested them that he will arrange the amount and will give them soon. He further deposed that all of them insisting that at first he will arrange the money and Santro Car and thereafter they will take Bharti to their house.
29. Prosecution also examined Sh. Daya Ram grand father of deceased Bharti who deposed that her grand daughter was married with Vikas on 28.11.2004 as per Hindu Rites and sufficient dowry articles were given in the marriage of her grand FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 35 of 69 daughter. He further deposed that one Maruti Car made 800cc along with 10.12 tola of gold and other items including cash of Rs. 25,251/ were given. He identify the accused persons in the Court. He further deposed that in the month of December, 2004, his grand daughter told that her husband, father in law, jeth and jethani are not treating her well as they were demanding a Santro car in place of Maruti car and a sum of Rs. One lac in cash and all the accused persons are putting pressure on her to bring the same. He further deposed that he advised his grand daughter that after first stage of marriage, some minor quarrels had to happen and all the matters will be sorted out with the passage of time. He further deposed that on the last day of December 2004, Bharti went to her matrimonial home and in the first week of January, 2005, his son Ved Prakash again told him that the in laws of Bharti are again putting a pressure to gave a Santro Car and Rs. 1 lac and they are adamant to gave beating to Bharti. He further deposed that on the next day, he along with his son Ved Prakash went at the residence of his daughter Lilawati at Najafgarh and she also accompanied them and they reached at the matrimonial home of Bharti. He further deposed that his son in law (husband of FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 36 of 69 Lilawati) and father in law were not present at their home at Najafgarh and they had gone for their personal work and due to the reason, his daughter Lilawati accompanied them at the house of accused persons. He further deposed that his daughter Lilawati was the Mediator in the marriage of Bharti and accused Vikas, Jeth, Jethani and mother in law of Bharti were found present at their home. He further deposed that a talk was going on between them and the accused persons started heated arguments with them, and he and his son Ved Prakash told the accused persons, that they had given the sufficient dowry articles in the marriage of Bharti. They requested them not to torture Bharti and also not to demand more dowry articles. He further deposed that the accused persons told them that, if, the demand of a Santro car and a sum of Rs. One lac is not given to them, then they will not keep Bharti at their house. He further deposed that no report was lodged by them, as they never wanted to flare up the matter for the sake of his grand daughter.
He further deposed that on the third week of February, his grand daughter came to visit her father and then came to him, at his plot and when he inquired from her about FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 37 of 69 the conduct of her in laws, she replied that the accused persons are still persisting with the demand of Santro Car and Rs. 1 lac. He further deposed that he pacify his grand daughter and told to manage for Santro Car and sum of Rs. One lac which has been demanded by accused persons. He further deposed that his son Ved Prakash had not replied to his request so he understood that a Santro Car and Rs. One lac is beyond the capacity of his son. He further deposed that on 15.05.2005, Bharti was left at their residence by her husband Vikas and he also uttered the words that he will not come again to take Bharti. He further deposed that on 1406.2005, he came to his residence after morning walk and received a telephone message from somebody at 07:00 AM that her grand daughter had hanged herself and she had expired. He further deposed that he along with his son Satya Prakash reached at their house which was in the idle of the Village where Ved Prakash was residing. He further deposed that he saw her grand daughter was hanging with a chunni with a ceiling fan inside a room which was on the first floor and she had expired. He further deposed that after sometime, police officials also reached at the spot. He further deposed that accused persons had also FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 38 of 69 demanded a sum of Rs. 34 lacs for running the business of Vikas but this fact was not disclosed earlier to him by his son as he was not keeping a good health.
30. PW 6 Sh. Sant Ram deposed that on 27.06.2005, he was coming from market and he saw crowd at the house of Randhir Singh. He further deposed that he went there and in his presence the dowry articles and Maruti car No. DL 4C AA 2685 were handed over in his presence by Randhir Singh to Insp. Inshwar Singh vide seizure memo Ex.PW6/A, PW2/X7 and Ex.PW2/X6 which bears his signatures.
31. PW 7 Pandit Radhey Shyam deposed that on 14.06.2005 at about 06:30 AM, he was going to buy milk and when he reached near the house of Ved Prakash bearing no. 400, he heard the noise of crying from the house. He further deposed that he went inside and the voice of crying was coming from the roof, he went on the roof and saw that the daughter of Ved Prakash was hanging with a chunni from the hook of the fan in the room. He further deposed that she appeared dead as there was no movement in her body and Ved Prakash, his wife and son were crying and trying to bring down the body but he persuaded them not to do so as she was already dead and FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 39 of 69 asked them to report to Police. He further deposed that on hearing the cries, the ladies of mohalla also reached there and someone informed the Police. After some time Police came at the spot and his statement was recorded by the Police on 29.06.2005.
32. PW8 Raj Dulari is the mother of deceased Bharti and she has deposed almost on the same lines as of her husband Ved Prakash. Besides this, she has also deposed that the mother and elder brother of accused Yogesh informed them to arrange the marriage as per their status in the society as his brother Vikas is employed in a Bank. She further deposed that they have spent about Rs.78 lakhs on the marriage of their daughter. They had given a Maruti 800 car, 1012 tolas gold jewelery and 25000/ cash and other household articles at the marriage of their daughter such as dowry articles etc. She has further deposed that in the month of December 2004, her daughter had informed her on phone that accused Vikas was demanding a Santro Car and her jethani, jeth and mother in law were demanding Rs.1 lakh cash and she was also beaten. In February 2005, accused Vikas left her daughter to their house saying that until the Santro Car and Rs.1 lakh cash were not FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 40 of 69 given, he will not took their daughter back. She had further deposed that, at the time of marriage, accused Vikas was not employed in the bank and this fact was concealed from them. She has deposed that her husband Ved Prakash had also offered financial help to purchase typewriter and one Photostat machine to put his daughter in business as she has done stenography course. She has further deposed that mother in law of her daughter informed them, that their land was likely to be acquired and they should arrange money otherwise they will keep Bharti as maid servant. PW8 further deposed that her daughter had informed them that her husband Vikas was having illicit relations with his bhabhi as their daughter had seen both of them in the compromising position and on this, Vikas had severely beaten her daughter. She further deposed that her daughter was also beaten by her jethani and when her jeth came home, he slapped her by saying that the matter should not be leaked out as it involved the reputation of the family.
PW8 further deposed that on 17.05.2005, Vikas had left their daughter at their home and told them to give a sum of Rs.34 lakhs and a Santro car, otherwise, he will not bring back Bharti to her matrimonial home. Thereafter, despite their FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 41 of 69 several requests to Vikas and his parents, they did not come to bring Bharti to her matrimonial home. On 10.06.2005, PW8 along with her husband and Leelawati went to the matrimonial home of her daughter but father in law of Bharti was not found present there and they requested, accused persons not to insist them for giving Santro car and also stated that they are in the process of arranging money, but accused persons remained stick to their demand. She further deposed that on 13.06.2005 also, her husband had made a telephonic call to accused Yogesh and Vikas requesting them to leave their demand of Santro car and cash but they did not pay any heed to their requests. Bharti had also requested her husband to leave the demand of car and that her parents are trying to fulfill their demand of cash but accused Vikas told her that unless their demands are met, they will not allow her to enter inside her matrimonial home.
PW8 further deposed that next day morning at 6.00am, their daughter served a cup of tea to them and thereafter, she went upstairs to attend the call of nature in the toilet on the first floor of the house. After some time, her son Vikas went upstairs to the toilet to ease himself but he found the FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 42 of 69 door of room opened which used to remain closed and on seeing the inside scene, he started crying and raised alarm and when PW8 and her husband went upstairs, they found their daughter was hanging with the ceiling. They tried to bring her body down but in the meantime, on hearing their cries, their neighbor Radhey Shyam and other neighborers reached there and they told that police after arriving the spot should bring down the body as her daughter was not alive at that time. She further deposed that after some time, police reached at the spot and after searching the body, a suicide note was recovered from her undergarments. The police had also obtained her signatures on a paper and she had signed on Ex.PW5/A at point B. PW8 had also identified the handwriting of her daughter on Mark A1 to A2 in a diary Ex.PW2/X1 and Mark A10 to A27 in a diary Ex.PW2/X2 and A3 to A9 in a diary Ex.PW2/X3 and handwriting in the answer sheet mark A28 to A48 in photocopy of answer sheet in Ex.PW2/X4, as she had seen her daughter writing and signing in her presence. She had also given statement Ex.PW8/A before the SDM in his office on 17.06.2005, bearing her signatures at point A.
33. PW 16 Pandit Antaryami Shastri deposed that he is FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 43 of 69 Purohit by profession and on 28.11.2004, he performed the marriage/pheras of Bharti D/o Ved Prakash as per Hindu Rites and Rituals. He identified the accused Vikas in the Court.
34. PW 22 Sh. Vikas Vats deposed that he reside at H. No. 400, Village Mundka, Delhi along with his parents and at the time of incident he was pursuing his graduation by correspondence. He further deposed that his parents performed the marriage of his elder sister Bharti with accused Vikas. He identified the accused in the Court. He further deposed that on 28.11.04 at the time of marriage Vikas used to work in Connaught Place branch of ICICI Bank and his father had made an expenditure of about Rs. 78 lacs in the said marriage. He further deposed that they had given Maruti 800 car, jewelery and other gifts in the marriage and after said marriage he felt that there is some problem with his sister Bharti at her matrimonial home but his parents did not use to talk in his presence in detail regarding his elder sister Bharti, but later on with the passage of time he came to know from his parents, that the husband of his sister Bharti, namely Vikas and her brotherinlaw (Jeth) Yogesh and sisterinlaw (jethani) Swati as well as her motherinlaw Smt. Jayawanti used to torture FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 44 of 69 his sister Bharti at her matrimonial home and used to demand Rs.1 lac and a Santro car from her.
He further deposed that once his father and his grand father had gone to the matrimonial home of his sister to convince them but even on that occasion all the accused demanded Rs.1 lac and a Santro Car and his parents used to remain very disturb due to said demands of accused persons and illtreatment given by them to his sister. He further deposed that once in the year 2005, he had visited the matrimonial home of his sister Bharti and during his said visit Bharti told him that all the accused and her deceased mother inlaw had given beatings to her. He further deposed that after hearing this he made a complaint of this fact to all the accused persons and he came back to his house from the matrimonial home of his sister, without even eating or drinking anything. He further deposed that after reaching his home he narrated this fact to his parents and thereafter his father had a telephonic conversation at the matrimonial home of his sister. PW 22 further deposed to the effect that on 17.05.2005 accused Vikas left his sister Bharti at his home and later on he came to know from his parents that the in laws of his FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 45 of 69 sister Bharti had said that if Rs. 34 lacs and a Santro car is not given to them, then they will not take his sister Bharti back to her matrimonial home. He further deposed that on 10.06.2005 his parents took his sister Bharti to her matrimonial home but her in laws refused to keep his sister Bharti at the matrimonial home as such his parents took his sister Bharti back. He further deposed that on 13.06.05 his parents had telephonic conversation with the in laws of his sister and requested them to take his sister Bharti back to her matrimonial home. He further deposed that on the same day at about 8 p.m. accused Vikas made a telephonic call at his residence and his parents again requested him to take Bharti back to her matrimonial home but he refused to do so. He further deposed that his sister Bharti also had a talk on telephone with accused Vikas and requested him to take her back to her matrimonial home but he refused for the same unless a Santro car and cash of Rs.34 lacs is given. He further deposed that after hearing these words from the mouth of accused Vikas his sister Bharti became very much disturb and did not eat or drink anything on that night and his parents also did not eat of drink anything, however, he had taken meal on that night.
FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 46 of 69 He further deposed that on 14.06.2005 at about 6.30 AM when he went on the roof of first floor to go to washroom, he saw that the door of one room which was built on the roof was partially lying open, which usually remained closed and when he went inside the said room, he saw that his sister Bharti was hanging with a Chunni with the hook of the ceiling fan and after seeing this he started weeping and called his parents for help. He further deposed that after hearing cries his father, mother and one of his neighbor namely Sh. Radhey Shyam came upstairs, some more neighborers also reached in that room and when they tried to remove the body of his sister from the hook, then Sh. Radhey Shyam and other neighborers who were present there asked them not to do so, saying that Bharti is no more alive and Police will do the needful later on. He further deposed that after some time police and thereafter SDM also reached there. He further deposed that in his opinion his sister Bharti committed suicide due to atrocities committed by the accused persons upon her due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry i.e. Rs.34 lacs in cash and a Santro car by his parents. He further deposed that Police recorded his statement.
35. I have heard Sh. P.K. Samadhiya, Ld. Addl. PP for FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 47 of 69 the State and Sh. R. N. Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the accused persons and have carefully gone through the record.
36. In his arguments Ld. Defence counsel argued that the deceased has committed suicide at her parental home as her husband had left her at her parental home on 17.08.2005 and she remained in her parental home around a month. It is also submitted by Ld. defence counsel that there is no specific allegations against the accused persons for demand of dowry as well as for harassment as no such specific time and date has been given by the prosecution witnesses in their testimony recorded in the Court.
It is further submitted that in the PCR form vide Ex.PW1/X matter was reported to the police at 100 number and it was recorded by the Police in the PCR form, "husband is having some relation with someone else". It is also submitted that the statement of PW 8 Smt. Raj Dulari, Mother of the deceased Bharti was not recorded along with PW 2, the father of the deceased. It is submitted that as alleged by the prosecution that both PW 2 and PW 8 were having the knowledge of harassment to the deceased Bharti by the accused persons on account of demand of dowry and amount FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 48 of 69 of Rs. One lac at the initial stage, later on it was increased to Rs. 34lacs and a Santro car. It is further submitted by Ld. defence counsel that Smt. Leelawati PW 21 is the Bua of deceased Bharti who was staying nearby to the matrimonial house of the deceased in Najafgarh and she was having no knowledge of any demand of dowry by the accused persons from the deceased Bharti. It is submitted that false story has been cooked up by the prosecution and no such statement regarding harassment on account of demand of dowry has been given to the SDM at the first instance and all the witnesses particularly PW 2, PW 3, PW 8 had confronted with their statements so recorded by the SDM and by the police at the first instance.
It is further submitted that there are no allegations against the accused persons under Section 406 IPC i.e criminal breach of trust for withholding the Istridhan of the deceased by the accused persons.
37. Ld. Defence counsel also argued that PW 22 is the brother of deceased and he had deposed on the basis of hear say evidence as has been heard by him in the discussion took place between his parents and his sister, deceased Bharti and FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 49 of 69 the evidence of this witness can not be relied upon being hear say. It is also submitted that the suicide note not properly proved as the opinion was given on the photocopy by the forensic expert which was not matched with the original one. Therefore, the suicide note is having no value in the eyes of law as the same could not be proved as per law. Ld. Counsel for the accused persons has also contented that the PW 2, PW 3, PW 8 had confronted in their cross examination at different stages of their cross examination, as, certain facts were not recorded by the SDM in his statement so given by these witnesses particularly Ex.PW8/A, the statement of PW 2 recorded before the SDM. It is submitted by Ld. defence counsel that these witnesses can not be relied upon as they have made improvement in their statement in the court while certain facts are not stated by them before the SDM concerned. Now the improvements has been made by these witnesses with a sole motive to get the accused persons convicted for the offence of dowry death as defined under Section 304 B IPC, while there was no harassment has been caused by the accused persons at any point of time to the deceased. It is also argued by Ld. Defence counsel that the FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 50 of 69 suicide has been committed by the deceased only on account of the extra marital affair of the accused Vikas and the marriage was also not consummated between them. It is also argued that the committal of suicide by the deceased at her parental home can not be attributed, to have been caused due to harassment on account of demand of dowry. Ld. Defence counsel has also relied upon pages of diary produced by the defence in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, where the witnesses has identified and admitted the pages of the diary Ex.PW2/DA, Ex.PW2/DB, Ex.PW2/DC and Ex.PW2/DE. This arguments of Ld. Defence counsel is also having no force as, if, the diary pages so produced by the defence are admitted to be correct, then at the same time there is a suicide note also which has been recovered from the cloths of the deceased. The suicide note is a proved document, where the specific allegations are there regarding harassment on account of demand of dowry as well as regarding illicit relation of the accused Vikas.
Ld. Defence counsel also argued that the deceased was preparing for the examination of DIET and B.Ed. It is also submitted that PW 8 admitted in her cross examination FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 51 of 69 regarding, appearance of her daughter in the exams. It is submitted that the deceased was left on her request at her parental home and accused persons never left the deceased Bharti on account of demand of dowry.
Ld. Addl. PP for the State has submitted that the testimony of PW 2, PW 3, PW 8 and PW 22 can not be discarded, merely on the ground that they have made some improvements in their examination in chief. They also deposed that certain facts were narrated to the SDM but same were not recorded by the SDM, for the reasons best known to him. It is also submitted by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State that the conduct of the family members of the deceased was natural as they have made the allegations against the accused persons. No such allegation has been made against the father in law. Therefore, it can not be believed that the accused persons has been falsely implicated in this case.
38. Ld. Counsel for accused persons has relied upon the following judgments :
1. Lachman @ Raju & Ors. Vs. State cited as (Govt of NCT of Delhi (4) JCC 2926 High Court of Delhi, on the issue of no demand of dowry at the time of marriage.
FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 52 of 69
2. Meka Ramaswamy Vs. Dasari Mohan & Ors. 1998 (1) Crime 138 (SC) Supreme Court of India, on the issue of no demand of dowry at the time of marriage.
3. Sunil Bajaj Vs. State of MP cited as IV (2001) CLR.131 (SC) on the issue of, no demand of dowry at the time of marriage, vague and general allegation, material contradiction.
4. State Vs. Lal Mani and Ors. Cited as 2011 (4) JCC 2015 High Court of Delhi, on the issue of no prior complaint was made and no external injuries in PM report.
5. State Vs. Sohan Lal & Ors. Cited as 2011 (3) JCC 1966 Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, on the issue of no complaint made before death, generic statements regarding harassment.
6. Narsoji Rao Vs. State of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court cited as 1 (1994) LLR 399, on the issue of specific harassment to be proved to constitute dowry death.
7. Vipin Vs. State of A.P cited as 2013 (2) JCC 1330 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, on the issue of prosecution failed to proved harassment and cruelty.
8. Durga Prasad & Anr. Vs. State of M.P cited as 2010 (3) JCC 1852 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, on the issue of bold statement harassment on account of dowry, cruelty and FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 53 of 69 harassment not proved.
9. Vishamber Vs. State of Karnatka cited as 2006 (4) Crimes 1 Hon'ble Karnatka High Court, on the issue of illicit relation with somebody else and it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that merely because accused was having affair would not constitute cruelty.
10. Ghusabhai Raisanghbhai Chorasiya & Ors. Vs. State of Gujrat cited as 2015 (2) Crimes 169 (SC) Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, on the issue of illicit relationship does not account cruelty.
11. Anup Kumar Verma Vs. State of Jharkhand cited as 11 (2004) LLR 1 of Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court, on the issue of extra marital relationship and no legal evidence to substantiate prosecution case under 304 IPC.
12. State of Punjab Vs. Satnam Singh cited as 1 (1997) DMC 637 (DB) Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, on the issue of facts not stated in FIR about ill treatment of deceased by accused due to insufficient dowry.
13. Narender Kumar & Anr. Vs. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) cited as 2008 (1) JCC 1 Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, on the issue of facts not stated before SDM failure of marriage may be FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 54 of 69 because of different reasons.
14. Bhola Ram Vs. State of Punjab cited as 2014 (1) JCC 101 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, on the issue of merely making demand for dowry not enough.
15. Vitthal Vs. State of Maharashtra cited as 2009 (2) Crime 596 (Bom) Hon'ble Bombay High Court, on the issue of no complaint when deceased came to her parents.
16. Ajay & Ors. Vs. State cited as 2017 (2) JCC 1154 of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, on the issue of based on the general and omnibus allegations of sweeping nature is nothing but abuse of process of law.
17. Suresh Kumar @ Shashi Vs. State of Haryana cited as 2009 (5) RCR (Criminal) of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, on the issue of suicide note, not specific about cruelty in connection with the demand of dowry and same was not proved.
18. Chitresh Kumar Chopra Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) cited as 2009 (4) JCC 2507 of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, on the issue of the cause of suicide has not been properly mentioned or explained in the suicide note.
39. The evidence so adduced by the prosecution FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 55 of 69 witnesses particularly PW 2 being father of the deceased Bharti and FIR has been registered on his statement vide Ex.PW2/A which was recorded by the SDM concerned on 14.06.2005. Though, the facts as narrated by PW 2 are based on hear say as the same has been narrated to him by his wife PW 8 Raj Dulari being the mother of the deceased. In his arguments, it is submitted by Ld. Defence counsel that the witnesses PW 2, PW 3, PW 8 and PW 21 have categorically admitted in their cross examination that at the time of marriage there was no demand of dowry by the accused persons. It is also submitted by Ld. Defence counsel that accused persons are belonging to well off family and there was no occasion for them to demand a car from the parents of the deceased, when they themselves are financially sound and are having good reputation in the society. This arguments of Ld. Counsel is also having no force as the allegations regarding demand of dowry has been made against the accused persons after the marriage only. It is presumed that mother is the best friend of her daughter to teach her in her life and the daughter is always expected to disclose all the facts regarding her matrimonial life or otherwise to her mother only. Here in the present case as PW 8 has deposed in her FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 56 of 69 testimony regarding the facts of demand of dowry by the accused persons from the deceased Bharti.
PW 8 also deposed regarding the illicit relation of accused Vikas with his sister in law (Bhabi) as narrated to her by her daughter Bharti. PW 8 also deposed regarding the beatings given to Bharti by her husband, Jeth and Jethani, when Bharti saw her Jethani and her husband in compromising position. There are specific allegations of demand of Santro car by the accused persons as well as demand of Rs. 45 lacs by the accused persons from deceased Bharti and her parents. The testimony of PW 2 and PW 8 has been duly corroborated by PW 3, the grand father of the deceased. Smt. Leelawati, Bua of the deceased and PW 22 Vikas Vats, brother of the deceased Bharti. Though, the deposition of PW 2, PW 3 and PW 22 are based on hear say but there testimony has corroborated the statement of PW 8 Smt. Raj Dulari, mother of the deceased. Therefore, in such circumstances the testimony of PW 2, PW 3 and PW 22, even based on hear say can not be discarded as they have corroborated the testimony of PW 8. Though, there are confrontations and minor contradictions in the testimony of PW 2, PW 3, PW 8 and PW 22, there FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 57 of 69 deposition is appears to be natural. In the cross examination, it has been brought by Ld. Defence counsel on record that certain facts could not be disclosed to the SDM concerned when their statement was recorded by him.
40. The matrimonial disputes/offences are considered to be the continuing offences and when the entire family was in the grief as they have lost their daughter, as she had committed suicide, therefore in the human conduct, it is natural and obvious that a person who is in the state of grief may not be in a position to disclose all the facts at one time. It is not a case of murder or dacoity by a stranger where the facts regarding the commission of crime is to be disclosed to the Police at the time of registration of FIR, but it is a case of dowry death, where the suicide has been committed by a married woman within seven years of her marriage. Particularly, in this case within one year of marriage and there is a presumption in favour of the prosecution under Section 113 B of the Evidence Act, which reads as under :
113 B. Presumption as to dowry death.--When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 58 of 69 before her death such woman has been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
The bare reading of the aforesaid provisions made it clear that there is a presumption in favour of the prosecution that when unnatural death is caused within seven years of marriage and the deceased has been subjected to cruelty and harassment soon before her death on account of demand of dowry.
The Hon'ble Apex Court in case tiled as Kailash Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 2007 SC 107 has been pleased to held that :
"The words "soon before" in section 113 B can not be limited by fixing time limit. It is left to be determined by the Courts, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case ".
41. It is also submitted by counsel for accused persons that they are the family members and their testimony can not be FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 59 of 69 relied upon. This arguments is also having no force as in the judgment titled as Rajinder Kumar Vs. State of Haryana cited as 2015 II AD (S.C.) 223 wherein it is held that, "Statement of family members of the deceased, lady can not be discarded on the ground that they are relatives and are interested witnesses, till a contradiction is shown in their deposition or cross examination. The prosecution was successful in proving the ingredients of Section 304 B IPC".
Hon'ble Apex Court in the above judgment has also held that :
10. Section 304B of IPC relates to dowry death. For the purpose of the said Section, a presumption as to dowry death can be raised only on proof of the following essentials.
(a) the death of woman has been caused by burns or bodily injury or has occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances.
(b) The said death has occurred within seven years of her marriage
(c) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives.
(d) Such cruelty or harassment was for, FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 60 of 69 or in connection with, any demand for dowry and
(e) She was meted out with such cruelty or harassment soon before her death.
In the judgment of Rajinder Kumar Vs. State of Haryana (Supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court also referred the following judgments. Case tiled as Kaliaperumal vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2004) 9 SCC 157.
11. In the case of Hira Lal & Others Vs. State (Govt. of NCT), Delhi, (2003) 8 SCC 80, this Court analyzed Section 304B IPC and Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act and made the following observations:
"8. Section 304B IPC which deals with dowry death, reads as follows:
"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. FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 61 of 69 Explanation.For the purpose of this subsection, 'dowry' shall have the same meaning as in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961).
(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."
The provision has application when 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 relatives of her husband for, or in connection with any demand for dowry. In order to attract application of Section 304B IPC, the essential ingredients are as follows:
(i) The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under a normal circumstance.
(ii) Such a death should have occurred within seven years of her FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 62 of 69 marriage.
(iii) She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband.
(iv) Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with demand of dowry.
(v) Such cruelty or harassment is shown to have been meted out to the woman soon before her death.
Section 113B of the Evidence Act is also relevant for the case at hand.
Both Section 304B IPC and Section 113B of the Evidence Act were inserted as noted earlier by Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act 43 of 1986 with a view to combat the increasing menace of dowry deaths.
Section 113B reads as follows:
"113B. Presumption as to dowry death.When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 63 of 69 death. Explanation.For the purposes of this section, 'dowry death' shall have the same meaning as in Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)."
The necessity for insertion of the two provisions has been amply analysed by the Law Commission of India in its 21st Report dated 10 81988 on "Dowry Deaths and Law Reform".
Keeping in view the impediment in the preexisting law in securing evidence to prove dowryrelated deaths, the legislature thought it wise to insert a provision relating to presumption of dowry death on proof of certain essentials. It is in this background that presumptive Section 113B in the Evidence Act has been inserted. As per the definition of "dowry death" in Section 304B IPC and the wording in the presumptive Section 113B of the Evidence Act, one of the essential ingredients, amongst others, in both the provisions is that the woman concerned must have been "soon before her death" subjected to cruelty or harassment "for or in connection with the demand of dowry".
Presumption under Section 113B is FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 64 of 69 a presumption of law. On proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death. The presumption shall be raised only on proof of the following essentials :
(1) The question before the court must be whether the accused has committed the dowry death of the woman. (This means that the presumption can be raised only if the accused is being tried for the offence under Section 304B IPC.) (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives.
(3) Such cruelty or harassment was for or in connection with any demand for dowry.
(4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death."
12. In the present case the death of Raj Rani occurred within seven years of her marriage. It is not disputed that her death is not under normal circumstances. Statements of the complainant (PW
7) and Hari Chand (PW13) are specific about the harassment of the deceasedRaj Rani by the accused in connection with the demand of dowry. It is also evident from the evidence on record that she FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 65 of 69 was meted out with such harassment soon before her death.
13. In view of the evidence on record, as discussed above, we hold that the prosecution was successful in proving the ingredients of Section 304B IPC. The Trial Court rightly presumed that the accused has caused the dowry death of the victim and the High Court rightly upheld the conviction and sentence.
14. We find no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. The appellant is directed to be taken into custody forthwith to serve remainder period of sentence.
42. Here in the present case, the marriage of the deceased with accused Vikas Sharma took place on 28.11.2004 and the deceased committed suicide on 14.06.2005 within 78 months of marriage. Moreover a suicide note vide Ex. P2 was also recovered from the cloths of the deceased, wherein, it is specifically mentioned that she has been harassed by the in laws on account of demand of dowry as well as her husband was having the extra marital affair with his Bhabhi, the accused in the present case. The suicide note is duly proved by PW Ms. Deepa Verma, Forensic expert who proved the handwriting appearing on the suicide note and the original writings provided to the FSL for comparison. The arguments of FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 66 of 69 Ld. Defence counsel that suicide note being photocopy can not be presumed to be proved as per law, is having no force as the handwriting has been matched with the original handwritings of the deceased.
43. In view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the judgments, so relied upon by the Ld. defence counsel are not applicable to the facts of the present case based on distinguished facts. As in the present case, it is established on record that the death has been caused within seven years of marriage, particularly within one year of marriage in this case. The PW 8 and other witnesses has proved on record that the deceased was subjected to harassment and cruelty on account of demand of dowry as they demanded Rs. 45 lacs and Santro car from the deceased and her parents. It is also proved on record by the suicide note that deceased was subjected to harassment by the accused persons on account of demand of dowry. It is also established on record that the deceased remained at her parental home in the last month of her life where she has been left by accused Vikas to stay with her parents, until and unless the demand of dowry is fulfilled by the parents of the deceased. It is also FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 67 of 69 established on record that there was a telephonic conversation on the preceding night of fateful day when the deceased committed suicide in her parental home and left behind her family in grief and a suicide note was also recovered from her cloths which is duly proved by the prosecution by PW 25.
44. Though, there are no allegations against the accused persons that they have been entrusted with any property of the deceased or they have retained the Istridhan of the deceased or dishonestly misappropriates or converts the such property to their own use. Moreover, all the Istridhan articles has already been recovered by the Police from the accused persons which has been got released by parents of deceased on superdari.
45. Accordingly in view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has been able to establish on record beyond reasonable doubt that the accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention has committed the offence punishable under Section 498A/34 IPC by harassing the deceased Bharti on account of demand of dowry. It is established on record that the deceased has committed suicide as she has been subjected to harassment and cruelty soon before her death on account of demand of FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 68 of 69 dowry and thereby in furtherance of their common intention accused persons have committed the offence of dowry death under Section 304 B/34 IPC. However, no such offence under Section 406/34 IPC is made out against the accused persons. Accordingly all the accused Vikas Sharma, Swati and Yogesh Sharma are convicted for the offence under Section 498A/304B/34 IPC. Let they be heard on quantum of sentence.
Announced in the open court on March 20, 2018. (Mukesh Kumar) Addl. Sessions Judge04 (NorthWest) Rohini Courts, Delhi.
FIR No. 606/2005 P.S Nangloi State Vs. Vikas Kumar & Ors. Page No. 69 of 69