Himachal Pradesh High Court
Chaman Lal And Others vs State Of H.P on 26 October, 2016
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 135 of 2008.
Date of Decision: 26th October, 2016.
.
Chaman Lal and others .....Appellants.
Versus
State of H.P. ....Respondent.
of
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
rt Whether approved for reporting? Yes For the Appellants: Mr. Dinesh Sharma and Mr. Y.Paul, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Deputy Advocate General.
Sureshwar Thakur, Judge
The instant appeal stands directed
against the judgment rendered by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Solan, District Solan, H.P. on 7.3.2008 in Case No. 5 FTC/7 of 2007, whereby, the latter Court recorded findings of conviction against the accused/respondents qua theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC besides in consequence thereto ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 2 imposed sentence of imprisonment upon them in the hereinafter extracted manner:-
"1. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a .
period of three years each and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- each for the commission of offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the of IPC and in case of default of payment of fine rt to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months each.
2. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- each for the commission of offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 IPC and in case of default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month each."
3. Brief facts of the case which are necessary to determine the appeal are that Ranjubala, deceased, daughter of Khushi Ram, was married to accused Chaman ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 3 Lal in November, 2005. On 23.10.2006 Ranjubala allegedly consumed poison in the matrimonial house and committed suicide. On 24.10.2006,Kushi Ram, father of deceased .
Ranjubala lodged report with the police wherein he alleged that about four months after the marriage, his daughter Ranjubala had told him that her husband Chaman Lal, mother-in-law Jai Devi and sister-in-law Sunita had been of harassing her in the matrimonial house without any cause, but he made her daughter to understand and sent her to rt her matrimonial house. On 20.10.2006, Ranjubala had told him on telephone about the maltreatment given to her by the accused in the matrimonial house and she also told that she was fed up with that, but he had assured his daughter to send some relatives to her matrimonial house and after that he had told about it to Om Dutt Pradhan, who advised him to settle the matter through relatives.
Thereafter, on 23.10.2006, he had sent his relatives Ashok Kumar, Prem Chand, Kuldeep, Anil, Kulwinder, Sandhya, Suresh and Rekha to the matrimonial house of his daughter Ranjubala, but on 23.10.2006 at about 9.30 p.m., he received a phone call from police station Nalagarh and was told that Ranjubala had consumed poison and died. Khushi Ram also stated in ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 4 his statement that his daughter Arti, who had gone to the matrimonial house of Ranjubala on 22.10.2006, told him that while she was in kitchen on 23.10.2006, accused .
Chaman Lal had slapped her sister Ranjubala and thereafter Ranjubala had gone towards cow shed whereat she was found lying unconscious. He also stated in his statement that his daughter Ranjubala was subjected to cruelty of by the accused in the matrimonial house and their conduct forced her to commit suicide. On the basis of statement of rt Khushi Ram, FIR was recorded at Police Station Nalagarh.
Thereafter the police completed all the codel formalities.
3. On conclusion of investigations, into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was prepared and filed in the competent Court.
4. The accused were charged by the learned trial Court for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statements of accused, under Section 313 of ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 5 the Code of Criminal Procedure, were recorded in which they pleaded innocence. However, they did not lead any defence evidence.
.
6. On an appraisal of evidence on record, the learned trial Court, returned findings of conviction against the accused/appellant for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 read with of Section 34 of the IPC.
7. The accused/appellants herein are aggrieved by rt the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court. The learned defence counsel for the appellants has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court being reversed by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs standing replaced by findings of acquittal.
8. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Advocate General has with considerable force and vigour, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 6 contended qua the findings of conviction recorded by the Court below standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and theirs not .
necessitating interference, rather theirs meriting vindication.
9. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has, with studied care and of incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record.
10. Deceased rt Ranjubala was married to accused/appellant No.1 Chaman Lal in the month of November, 2005. She within less than one year elapsing therefrom committed suicide by consumption of poison, factum whereof stands unraveled in the apposite postmortem report comprised in Ex.PW8/B. Accused/respondent No.1 Chaman Lal, her husband besides accused No.2 and accused No.3, her mother-in-law and sister-in-law respectively are alleged to abet the commission of suicide by deceased Ranjubala. The prosecution had depended upon the testimonies of the relatives of deceased Ranju Bala as also upon the deposition of the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat concerned for propagating qua the accused/appellants ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 7 herein during the currency of her stay at her matrimonial home, meteing ill-treatment besides maltreatment to the deceased hence actuating besides instigating her to .
commit suicide. The deposition of PW-1, Khushi Ram, the father of the deceased unveils of within 2-3 months of marriage standing solemnized inter se his deceased daughter with accused Chaman Lal, the accused of perpetrating ill-treatment upon her. However, he has omitted to communicate therein the nature of the ill-
rt treatment perpetrated by the accused upon the deceased nor also he has communicated its enormity. Resultantly, he has obviously in his testification made a nebulous attribution qua perpetration of ill-treatment upon the deceased by the accused during former's stay at her matrimonial home. Given lack of enunciations with specificity qua the nature of ill-treatment besides its potency, it is hazardous to invincibly conclude therefrom qua its nature besides its gravity, in sequel wherefrom it is unbefitting to conclude qua the alleged ill-treatment perpetrated upon the deceased by the accused during the former's stay at her matrimonial home hence goading besides instigating her to commit suicide.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 811. The deposition of PW-1, Khushi Ram stands corroborated by PW-2, Arti, his daughter besides by the deposition of PW-7 Anil Kumar. However, PW-2, the sister .
of the deceased and PW-7, the cousin brother of PW-1, both in their respective testifications comprised in their respective examinations-in-chief echoed qua after solemnization of marriage inter se the deceased and of accused Chaman Lal, both once and twice visiting the parental home of the deceased. Both also deposed qua on rt completion of stay, of the deceased in the company of her husband, at her parental home, her husband taking her along with him to her matrimonial home. However, when PW-1 has omitted to testify the aforesaid fact as stands conjointly deposed by PW-2 and PW-7, wherefrom an inevitable conclusion is qua PW-1 inventing the factum of the deceased on hers visiting her parental home hers unraveling the factum of hers standing ill-treated by the accused at her matrimonial home. Apart therefrom, with both PW-2 and PW-7 unanimously disclosing in their respective testimonies qua on the deceased visiting her parental home hers thereat standing accompanied by her husband, who after their stay thereat retrieved her ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 9 therefrom to her matrimonial home wherefrom it is befitting to conclude of hence amity prevailing inter se both besides qua when at the relevant time she stood .
accompanied by accused Chaman Lal to her parental home, she obviously hence not making any disclosure either to PW-1, PW-2 or PW-7 qua hers at her matrimonial home standing subjected to ill-treatment by the of accused/appellants herein. Resultantly, it appears qua the close relatives of the deceased Ranjubala contriving the rt factum qua hers on hers visiting her parental home hers making disclosures thereat qua hers at her matrimonial home standing subjected to ill-treatment by the accused, more so, given the lack of specification in their respective testifications qua the nature of ill-treatment which stood perpetrated by the accused upon the deceased or its gravity, it is inapt to secure a conclusion of thereupon the psyche of the deceased suffering torment nor it is apt to conclude of the accused actuating or instigating the deceased to commit suicide. Moreover, the principle of proximity inter se the alleged penal misdemeanors ascribed to the accused by the prosecution witnesses vis-a-
vis the ill-fated occurrence stands unsatiated significantly ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 10 when each of the prosecution witnesses omit to with specificity pronounce in their respective testifications qua the time whereat deceased Ranjubala visited her parental .
home whereat penal ascriptions vis-a-vis the accused/appellants stood ascribed vis-a-vis them by the deceased by the latter making the apposite purported communications to them. In sequel, it is hazardous to of record any firm conclusion therefrom qua at the time of the ill-fated occurrence it holding apposite proximity in time rt vis-a-vis the relevant purported penal misdemeanors ascribed to the accused by the prosecution witnesses. In aftermath, for lack of proximity inter se the alleged ascription of penal misdemeanors by the prosecution witnesses to the accused/respondents vis-a-vis the ill fated occurrence, the prosecution ought to be concluded to not succeed in proving the trite factum of the alleged penal misdemeanors ascribed by the prosecution witnesses to the accused/respondent goading deceased Ranjubala to commit suicide.
12. Be that as it may, a perusal of the record discloses of PW-1 making disclosures to the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat concerned, who has deposed as PW-3 qua ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 11 the trauma which befell upon the deceased at her matrimonial home. However,the factum of PW-1 making disclosures to PW-3 qua the trauma gripping the deceased .
Ranjubala at her matrimonial home appears to be engineered also it is visible of PW-3 in collusion with PW-1 contriving the factum of the deceased making a disclosure to PW-1 qua the woes or sufferings befalling upon her at of her matrimonial home significantly when PW-2, the daughter of PW-1 in her cross-examination has voiced rt therein qua the alleged penal misdemeanors perpetrated at her matrimonial home by the accused upon the deceased, not standing reported either to the panchayat or to the police. In sequel, thereto, it is also apt to conclude qua hence PW-1 engineering the factum qua penal misdemeanors standing perpetrated by the accused upon the deceased at the latter's matrimonial home.
13. Though PW-2, a purported eye witness to the incident of cruelty which purportedly occurred in immediate proximity to the ill-fated occurrence wherefrom the prosecution assays of its proving the charge against the accused, testifies qua the accused in immediate proximity to the ill-fated occurrence in her presence ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 12 slapping the deceased wherefrom it is befitting to conclude qua the findings of conviction recorded against the accused by the learned trial Court warranting no .
interference. However, the testimony of PW-2 is to construed conjointly with the testimony of PW-7 for ascertaining qua hence PW-2 deposing a truthful version qua the factum of the accused in immediate proximity to of the ill fated occurrence slapping deceased Ranjubala in her presence. Though, PW-2 rt deposes qua at the relevant time the deceased serving tea to her besides to PW-7 yet PW-7 has not voiced in his testification qua thereat accused Chaman Lal slapping deceased Ranjubala. Also PW-7 has omitted to testify qua the eruption of an altercation inter se the deceased Ranjubala and accused Chaman Lal at the site besides at the venue whereat PW-2 was also present. However, contrarily besides contradistinctively vis-a-vis PW-7, PW-2 deposes qua an altercation occurring inter se deceased Ranjubala and accused Chaman Lal. She in contradiction to PW-7 also deposes, qua accused Chaman Lal slapping deceased Ranjubala in his presence. Obviously, when both were conjointly present at the relevant time at the site of ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 13 occurrence, the omission by PW-7 to depose the trite factum aforesaid renders the testimony of PW-2 qua it being construable to be wholly engineered besides .
contrived, whereupon, no credence can be fastened. In aftermath, the aforesaid testification of PW-2 holds no vigour wherefrom the ensuing conclusion is of the relevant act of cruelty imputed to accused Chaman Lal by PW-2 of being discardable.
13. Furthermore, PW-2 deposes qua an altercation rt over telephone taking place inter se the deceased and accused Chaman Lal yet the factum aforesaid appears to be contrived significantly when precedingly thereto she falsely deposes of accused Chaman Lal slapping deceased Ranjubala, whereupon an inference spurs qua hence when accused Chaman Lal at the relevant time being available in his house, whereupon it is difficult to conclude of both holding any opportunity to hold a telephonic communication, especially when an inference qua possibility of a telephonic conversation occurring inter se both Chaman Lal and deceased Ranjubala would stem only when they were at the relevant time present at different locations, whereas, theirs being available together at the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 14 site of occurrence there was no opportunity for both to hold a telephonic conversation or also the testification of PW-2 qua theirs thereon holding an altercation vis-a-vis .
each other is bereft of credence. Tritely put the purported incident of cruelty which purportedly occurred in close proximity to the ill-fated occurrence does not hold any formidability nor hence it can be concluded of the of prosecution succeeding in proving its charge against the accused. rt
14. The learned Deputy Advocate General has contended with force of with the ill-fated occurrence taking place within less than one year elapsing since the solemnization of a marriage inter se deceased Ranjubala and accused Chaman Lal, the presumption embodied in Section 113 of the Indian Evidence Act standing attracted, wherefrom, it would be befitting for this Court to sustain the findings of conviction recorded against the accused.
However, the anchor for drawing succor from the aforesaid presumption embodied in Section 113 of the Indian Evidence Act is of proven cruelty standing perpetrated upon the deceased by the accused. Since, for reasons aforestated, there is no proven evident cruelty perpetrated ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP 15 upon the deceased by the accused, the benefit of the statutory presumption is unavailable for it standing attracted qua the accused.
.
15. The summom bonum of the aforesaid discussion is that the learned trial Court below has not appraised the entire evidence on record in a wholesome and harmonious manner apart therefrom the analysis of the material on of record by the learned trial Court suffers from a gross perversity or rt absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of the evidence on record.
16. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed and the accused are acquitted for the commission of offences punishable under Section 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC. In sequel, the judgment impugned before this Court is set aside. Fine amount, if deposited, be refunded to the accused/appellants. Records be sent back forthwith.
(Sureshwar Thakur)
26 th
October, 2016 Judge.
(jai)
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:27:01 :::HCHP