Delhi District Court
State vs . Rajinder Singh &Ors. on 18 February, 2014
IN THE COURT OF MS. TYAGITA SINGH: METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE (SOUTH WEST)-01, MAHILA COURT, DWARKA, NEW
DELHI
STATE VS. Rajinder Singh &ors.
FIR NO: 148/10
P. S. Nanakpura
ID No. 02405R0143822012
Date of institution of case :28.04.2012
Date on which case reserved for judgment :14.02.2014
Date of judgment :18.02.2014
Advocates appearing in the case :-
Sh. Pankaj Kumar, Ld. APP for State
Sh. P.S. Jha, Legal Aid Counsel for accused Rajinder Singh.
Sh. Neeraj Dahiya, Ld. Counsel for accused Narender Singh and Bajender Kaur.
JUDGEMENT U/S 355 Cr.P.C.:
a) Date of offence : 16.02.1997 onwards
b) Offence complained of : U/S 498-A/34 IPC
c) Name of complainant : Smt. Rozy @ Kanwaljeet
Kaur d/o Late Sh. Dalip
Singh r/o H. No. 318,
Rishi Nagar, Rani Bagh,
New Delhi.
d) Name of accused, his parentage, : (i) Rajinder
Singh(Husband)
local & permanent residence s/o Lt. Sh. Dharam Singh
(ii)Narender
Singh(Brother-in-law)
s/o Lt. Sh. Dharam Singh
(iii)Smt. Bajinder
Kaur(Sister-in-law)
w/o Narender Singh
All resident of Plot No. 11,
Gali No.1, Chand Nagar,
Tilak Nagar, New Delhi.
FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 1/11
St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
e) Plea of accused : Accused are falsely
implicated.
f) Final order : Accused are acquitted.
BRIEF FACTS OF CASE OF PROSECUTION ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1. In the present case, accused Rajinder Singh(husband of complainant), Narender Singh(Brother-in-law of complainant) and Smt. Bajinder Kaur( Sister-in-law of complainant) have been charged for the offence u/s 498-A/34 IPC on the ground that from the date of marriage of accused Rajinder Singh on 16.02.1997 with complainant Smt. Rozy @ Kanwaljeet Kaur ,they subjected the complainant Smt. Rozy to cruelty in-connection-with demand of dowry and committed criminal breach of trust in respect of stridhan articles of complainant.
2. The prosecution has examined seven witnesses on its behalf.
3. Pw1 is Smt. Rozy @ Kanwaljeet Kaur who stated in her examination-in-chief that she was married to Sh. Rajinder Singh on 16.02.1997 and she joined matrimonial house at Vishnu Garden where her Jeth Balbir Singh, Jethani Harjeet Kaur, Devar Narender Singh, Devrani Bajinder Kaur and mother-in-law Gurbachan Kaur were also residing. She stated that sufficient dowry articles were given to her in marriage vide list Ex. Pw1/A FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 2/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
bearing her signatures at point A. She alleged that in the matrimonial home, she was maltreated by her husband and in- laws on account of dowry and her Jeth, Devar and their wives used to instigate her husband to assault her physically. She stated that her husband was drunkard and used to demand money from her and on her refusal, he used to assault her. She stated that she requested her father number of times to arrange the money and he gave the money many times which was given to her husband. She further stated that her husband also demanded two wheeler scooter but her father gave Rs. 20,000/- in lieu of scooter within one year of marriage, but her husband did not purchase the scooter and exhausted all the money in liquor. She stated that she was beaten number of times but she does not remember the dates now and she lodged complaint before CAW Cell which is Ex. Pw1/B. She stated that her Devar and Devrani also used to assault her physically number of times and used to instigate her husband to demand money from her and her father. She stated that her husband sold all her stridhan articles without her consent and permission and exhausted the money in liquor.
4. In her further examination-in-chief dated 23.05.2013, Pw1 stated that once in year 2006, her husband attacked her with knife on her right foot but she stated that she had not gone to any hospital and had taken medical treatment from nearby clinic but FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 3/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
she does not have any copy of prescription. She further stated that her husband attacked her with knife on the instigation of her Devar and Devrani. She alleged that her Devar and Devrani hatched conspiracy against her so that she may leave the matrimonial house and they used to harass her due to which she moved complaints regarding beatings, to the local police station. She stated that in the month of January 2010, she moved complaint before CAW Cell vide Ex. Pw1/C but the same was got compromised. She stated that attitude of her husband and in-laws remained cruel towards her due to which she again moved present complaint in month of June 2010. She exhibited copy of her previous complaints as Ex. Pw1/D(I to V).
5. In her cross-examination, Pw1 stated that she does not remember the exact dates when she was beaten up by her husband. She stated that her husband demanded scooter after about one year of marriage but she does not remember the exact date. She further stated that she does not remember the date when Rs. 20,000/- was given. She stated that all her stridhan articles including gold jewelery approximately 10 tolas, furniture and utensils etc. were sold by her husband. She admitted that there is no bill of jewelery in the file. She stated that she is residing separately from her husband since last four years and presently, she is residing with her elder brother at Rani Bagh. She stated that FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 4/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
she started residing separately from her husband as he used to take excessive liquor.
6. In her cross-examination by Ld. Defence counsel for accused Narender Singh and Bajinder kaur, Pw1 stated that she got married 17 years ago and she was residing on the ground floor of the matrimonial house alongwith her husband for past 10 years. She stated that her Devar Narender Singh and Devrani Bajinder Kaur were residing on first floor. She stated that her relations with her husband were cordial but occasionally some sort of quarrel used to take place due to consumption of liquor by her husband. Pw1 further stated that her father-in-law had made a Will regarding matrimonial house bearing plot no. 11, Chand Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi according to which property has been divided into three equal shares amongst three brothers.
7. Pw1 further stated that since her marriage, relations between her Devar and Devrani were cordial but when the dispute regarding aforesaid matrimonial property arose, the relations between them turned bitter. She stated that for the first time on 01.11.2009, she made complaint against her Devar and Devrani. She denied the suggestion that she had lodged false complaint after being tutored by her Nandoi. She denied the suggestion that she had lodged present complaint against accused persons with a view to take share in the matrimonial property or to extort money FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 5/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
from them. She stated that her belongings are still stored at third floor of matrimonial house. She denied the suggestion that she is still having possession of the said floor with permission of her Devar and Devrani.
8. Pw2 is SI Rajpal who stated that on 08.11.2009, he was posted at P.S. Tilak Nagar and was on emergency duty and on receipt of DD no. 35 A, he went to the spot at Chand Nagar, Block no.11, Tilak Nagar but no incident of quarrel was found, so he went back to P.S and entered the report vide DD No. 5B dated 09.11.2009 that complainant Rozy had some squabbling with her Jethani and mother-in-law but no quarrel had taken place. He exhibited copy of DD no.35 A as mark Pw2/A and copy of DD no. 5B as Ex. Pw2/B.
9. In his cross-examination, he stated that he had not recorded statement of any person on the said day.
10. Pw3 is ASI Rambir who stated that on 08.11.2009 he was working as Duty Officer from 4 pm to 12 night and on receipt of PCR information, he entered the information in Rojnamcha vide DD no. 35A.
11. Pw4 is Constable Sunder Singh who brought the complaints dated 02.11.2009, 07.11.2009, 09.11.2009, 12.11.2009 and 19.01.2010 moved by complainant Rozy and the entries of all the complaints were made in register which are Ex. Pw4/A(I to V).
FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 6/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
Pw4 has further stated that the complaints were marked to SI Jassa Singh and HC Surender Kumar for inquiry and they gave the report that dispute was of civil nature and no police action was required.
12. Pw5 is Retired SI Chander Pal Singh who has stated that case file was assigned to him for further investigation and he collected record of previous complaints from P.S. Tilak Nagar which are already Ex. Pw1/D(I to V). He further stated that accused Narender Singh handed over some of the documents i.e. complaint by accused Rajinder Singh and Gurbachan Kaur mark Pw5/A1 and mark Pw5/A2 and one Deed of Will mark Pw5/A3 which were seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW5/A. Pw5 stated that he gave notice to the complainant for taking her stridhan but she refused to take the same, hence he took photographs of articles vide mark Pw5/1 to 8.
13. Pw6 is Sh. Mohan Singh i.e. brother of complainant Rozy. He stated that his sister was married to accused about 16 years ago and his father had given Rs. 20,000/- to accused. In his further examination-in-chief dated 10.09.2013, Pw6 stated that husband and in-laws of his sister used to demand dowry but he does not remember the exact date of demand. He stated that his father expired around two years back. He stated that he used to give Rs. 2,000/- per month to his sister and he had also given one gas FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 7/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
cylinder to his sister but her husband disposed off the same for fulfilling his habit of drinking. He further stated that accused persons had put demand of dowry to his father but not in his presence. He stated that his sister was even dragged out of matrimonial house at odd hours and she used to take shelter at his home.
14. In his cross-examination by Ld. Defence counsel, he stated that he had never visited police station and police had never recorded his statement. He admitted that accused persons had not raised any demand in his presence. He further admitted that whenever he visited the house of his sister, she never complained against the accused persons.
15. Pw7 is IO/ASI Onkar Singh who stated that investigation of the case was handed over to him on 07.09.2010 and he collected some documents vide seizure memo Ex. Pw7/A, recorded supplementary statement of complainant u/s 161 Cr.P.C and statement of her brother Mohan Singh and thereafter he was transferred and he handed over the case file to MHC(R).
16. In his cross-examination by Ld. Defence counsel, Pw7 admitted that no bill regarding jewelery was given to him by the complainant.
17. After closure of P.E, statement of accused persons was recorded in which they stated that they are innocent but preferred FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 8/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
not to lead Defence Evidence. Hence, final arguments were heard on last date and case was fixed for order for today. BRIEF REASONS FOR DECISION AND DECISION THEREOF
18. Perusal of evidence of main public witnesses Pw1 Rosy @ Kanwaljeet Kaur and Pw6 Sh. Mohan Singh i.e. brother of complainant reveal that both the witnesses have not mentioned specifically any date, time and place when and where demand of dowry was raised by the accused persons from the complainant and when they caused harassment to the complainant for non- fulfillment of that demand. Pw1 has just stated that her husband was drunkard and used to demand money from her but she has not mentioned that how much money he used to demand. She has stated at one place that her husband demanded two wheeler scooter and her father had given Rs. 20,000/- in lieu of scooter within one year of marriage but he exhausted all the money in liquor and did not purchase the scooter. However, she has not mentioned any date, time and place of demand of the scooter or of payment of Rs. 20,000/- by her father. She has just stated that she was beaten a number of times but she did not remember any specific date, time and place of beating.
19. Pw1 has also alleged that her brother-in-law and sister-in-law namely Narender Singh and Bajinder Kaur also used to assault her physically and used to instigate her husband but she has not FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 9/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
mentioned any specific date, time and year when they committed any cruelty upon her or when they raised demand of dowry from her. She has just leveled the allegations that her Devar and Devrani hatched a conspiracy against her so that she should leave the matrimonial house due to which they used to harass her. Though she exhibited certain previous complaints given to local police station but perusal of those complaints reveal that they are just the general complaints of quarrel between the family members and there was no mentioning of demand of dowry by accused persons, in those complaints.
20. Perusal of cross-examination of Pw1 dated 04.06.2013 reveals that it seems to be dispute of property i.e. matrimonial house bearing plot no. 11, Chand Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi between complainant, her husband and brother-in-law and it was due to the dispute of the property that the relations between them became bitter and complainant started lodging complaints against them. However, this is not a case of demand of dowry and harassment or cruelty in-connection-with demand of dowry. Pw6 Sh. Mohan Singh has admitted in his cross-examination that no demand was made by the accused persons in his presence and whenever he visited the house of his sister, she never complained against accused persons. Hence, this case seems to be a case of family dispute but not a case of harassment related to dowry FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 10/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.
demand. Prosecution has also failed to prove all the ingredients of offence of cruelty or harassment as defined in section 498-A IPC, against accused persons. Hence, all the accused persons are acquitted from offence u/s 498-A r/w section 34 IPC. Personal bond and surety bond of accused persons stand discharged. Original documents if any be released to the authorised persons on proper receipt and endorsement, if any, be cancelled. File be consigned to record room .
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ( TYAGITA SINGH ) TODAY ON 18th February, 2014. MM-01(SW), Mahila Court Dwarka Courts: New Delhi FIR no. :148/10 PS: Nanakpura Page no. 11/11 St vs. Rajinder Singh & ors.