Punjab-Haryana High Court
Krishan Lal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 2 September, 2013
Author: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Bench: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M)
Date of Decision: September 2, 2013
Krishan Lal and another
...Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr. Manvinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr. Sandeep Chhabra, DAG, Punjab,
for the respondent.
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, dated 31.3.2001, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, whereby the appellants were held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, IPC, and each one of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years, besides payment of fine of `5,000/- each, and in default thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months each.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant, Rulia Ram (PW-3), father of Shanti (since deceased), made a Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 2 statement to the police that he was resident of Village Sadak, District Ferozepur, and was running a Karyana shop. He had four sons and two daughters, out of whom three sons and two daughters were married. On 12.4.1994, his younger daughter, Shanti (deceased), aged about 21 years, was married to Kapil Kumar, son of the appellants, who were residents of Guru Har Sahai, District Ferozepur. At the time of marriage, sufficient dowry articles were given as per status of the complainant. Ten days after the marriage, the complainant had gone to Guru Har Sahai to see her daughter. His son-in-law, Kapil Kumar (son of the appellants), made demand of a Jeep. The complainant replied that he was not in a position to fulfil the demand. Thereafter, Kapil Kumar demanded that 10 bags of sugar be sent. After 2-3 days, the complainant sent ten bags of sugar and two tins of Ghee. 10-12 days thereafter, letter (Ex. P4) written by Shanti (since deceased) was received by the complainant through Miank Kumar, brother of Kapil Kumar. As per the said letter, 20 bags of sugar were demanded by the in-laws of Shanti, but the complainant was not in a position to supply the same. Thereafter, appellant Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Krishan Lal and Pushpa Rani, and Kapil Kumar started harassing and beating Shanti. The appellants and their co-accused demanded more dowry. The matter was brought to the notice of Rajinder Kumar Goel (PW-10), a Municipal Commissioner of Guru Har Sahai, who Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 3 was related to the complainant. Rajinder Kumar Goel made the appellants and their co-accused understand not to demand dowry and harass Shanti, but the appellants and their co-accused did not mend their ways. On 21.6.1994, the complainant brought Shanti to village Sadak. On 26.6.1994, Kapil Kumar came to the house of the complainant to take back Shanti and he made a demand of Rs. 50,000/- in cash. He also stated that in case the demand was not met, then Shanti would not be rehabilitated. On 30.6.1994, at about 2.00 p.m., the complainant had gone to Guru Har Sahai to enquire about the welfare of Shanti and on reaching near the house of Kapil Kumar, he saw that a number of persons had collected there. When he proceeded further, then he saw that the dead body of Shanti with burn injuries was lying there. Rajinder Kumar Goel (PW-10) was also present at the spot. Thereafter, the complainant along with Rajinder Kumar Goel went to the police station and lodged the report and requested the police to take action against the appellants.
3. A police party headed by Inspector Bhupinder Singh (PW-13) visited the spot and in their presence, Surinder Kumar and Darshan Lal identified the dead body. Inquest Report (Ex. P2) was prepared and thereafter the dead body was handed over to HC Daler Singh (PW-11) for getting the postmortem conducted. Half burnt clothes and the cot were taken into police possession vide recovery memo, which was attested by the Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 4 witnesses. Container containing kerosene, match-box and burnt match sticks were also taken into police possession vide separate recovery memo, which was attested by the witnesses. Rough site plan of the place of occurrence with correct marginal notes was prepared at the spot. Statements of the witnesses in terms of Section 161, Cr.P.C., were recorded. After the postmortem examination, the clothes worn by the deceased were produced by ASI Major Singh and the same were packed in a parcel and taken into police possession vide separate recovery memo. On 2.7.1994, the complainant produced letter (Ex. P4) before the police and the same was also taken into possession vide a separate recovery memo. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) was presented for prosecution of the appellants and their son, Kapil Kumar.
4. Since Kapil Kumar was juvenile, therefore, his case was referred to the Juvenile Justice Board for trial in accordance with law.
5. After supplying the copies to the appellants in terms of Section 207, Cr.P.C., the case of the appellants was committed to the Court of Session for their trial in accordance with law. The learned Trial Court, finding a prima facie case for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34, and Section 304-B, IPC, framed the charges against the appellants, to which Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 5 they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
6. In order to substantiate its allegations, the prosecution examined the following witnesses:-
PW-1 Dr. Manmohan Singh Dhillon, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Ferozepur, deposed that in the company of Dr. Ramesh Kumar (PW-2), autopsy on the dead body of Shanti, a female aged about 21 years, was conducted on 1.7.1994. According to the opinion of the doctors, the cause of death of Shanti was asphyxia due to strangulation which was antemortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.
PW-2 Dr. Ramesh Kumar stated that he had conducted the autopsy on the dead body of Shanti in the company of Dr. Manmohan Singh Dhillon (PW-1).
He concurred with the opinion of PW-1 Dr. Manmohan Singh Dhillon regarding the cause of death.
PW-3 Rulia Ram is the complainant and father of Shanti (since deceased). He had suffered his statement in consonance with the FIR, as already narrated in the earlier part of the judgment.
PW-4 Janak Raj deposed that on 2.5.1994, Rulia Ram had produced letter (Ex. P4) before the police in his presence, which was taken into possession vide Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 6 memo (Ex. P6).
PW-5 Chhinder Kumar, who is brother of Shanti (since deceased), deposed that the marriage of his sister was solemnized with Kapil Kumar on 12.4.1994.
They had given dowry in the marriage according to their status, but her (Shanti) in-laws were not satisfied and used to demand more dowry, and for that they used to harass and beat her. It was also deposed that they demanded 20 bags of sugar and his sister had sent a letter through Miank Kumar in that regard. He also deposed that they had sent ten bags of sugar and two tins of Ghee by the truck of Rajinder Kumar.
PW-6 Constable Ram Kumar deposed that on 30.6.1994 while being posted at Police Station, Guru Har Sahai, he delivered the special report at the residence of the Magistrate at 9.30 p.m. PW-7 Sunder Singh, Draftsman, deposed that he had prepared the scaled site plan (Ex. P7).
PW-8 Richhpal Singh deposed that on 17.7.1994, the appellants were produced before him by PW-10 Rajinder Kumar Goel. On 13.8.1994, Angrej Singh, Photographer, had produced the photographs (Ex. MO-11 to MO-20) and their negatives (Ex. M0-1 to MO-10). He further deposed that after completion of Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 7 the investigation, report under Section 173, Cr.P.C., was signed by Bhupinder Singh, Station House Officer.
PW-9 Kewal Krishan, Chief Pharmacist of Primary Health Centre, Guru Har Sahai, had produced the summoned bed head ticket of Pushpa Rani.
PW-10 Rajinder Kumar Goel stated that he was Municipal Commissioner of Guru Har Sahai. Rulia Ram was related to him. Daughter of Rulia Ram was married to Kapil Kumar, the son of the appellants. In the marriage, he was the mediator. Rulia Ram had given the dowry as per his status. 5-10 months after the marriage, appellant No. 1, Krishan Lal, had demanded sugar and ghee from the girl. Father of the girl had supplied sugar and ghee to the appellants. After that, again the appellants started demanding cash or jeep, but Rulia Ram was not in a position to pay cash or fulfil the demand of jeep. When Rulia Ram failed to fulfil the demand of the appellants, then they started giving beatings to the daughter of Rulia Ram. He requested the appellants not to harass the girl. He further deposed that he came to know that the daughter of Rulia Ram was murdered by the appellants by setting her on fire. He also deposed that few articles were taken into possession by the police Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 8 in his presence vide recovery memo (Ex. P9). After 2-3 hours, Krishan Lal, Pushpa Rani and Kapil Kumar came to him and made extra-judicial confession that they had burnt the daughter of Rulia Ram. The witness was requested to produce them before the police. The witness could not give the date on which the appellants and their co-accused were produced before the police.
PW-11 HC Daler Singh had tendered his affidavit (Ex. P10).
PW-12 Parveen Kumar, Photographer, deposed that the photographs (Ex. MO-11 to MO-20) and their negatives (MO-1 to MO-10) were clicked by him.
PW13 Inspector Bhupinder Singh was the investigating officer and he deposed in detail with regard to the investigation conducted by him.
7. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statements of the appellants in terms of Section 313, Cr.P.C., were recorded. In answer to the last question, appellant No. 1, Krishan Lal, stated as under:-
" No body of us was at home when Shanti died. She was frustrated because Kapil Kumar our son was not able to have inter-course with her after marriage. Age of Shanti at the time of marriage was 23 years and age of Kapil Kumar was about 14 years. On the fateful day, I was at my shop along with my son Kapil Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 9 Kumar and Ashwani Kumar s/o Tilak Raj when Shanti died. My wife Pushpa and younger son Miank/Karan were at Railway Station Guru Har Sahai as they had to go to Ferozepur in relations. Shanti either committed suicide by switching on the Gas cylinder or died in accidental death when cooking meals. We never demanded any dowry, cash or Jeep or Ghee or Sugar from her parents. Darshan Lal was sent by us to call father of Shanti from Mudki. We never made any extra judicial confession before Rajinder Goyal as we had committed no wrong. We all were detained by police illegally on the very day of death of Shanti, for more than 16/17 days. Pushpa was admitted in Civil Hospital, Guru Har Sahai, and was got discharged by Rajinder Goyal on 2.7.94. Pushpa is handicapped."
Similar stand was taken by appellant No. 2, Pushpa Rani.
8. No evidence in defence was led except for production of two bills (Exs. D1 and D2).
9. After completion of evidence of both the sides and hearing learned counsel for the parties, the learned Trial Court held both the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, IPC, and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each, besides payment of fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months each.
10. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that out of the essential three ingredients of Section 304-B, IPC, the Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 10 prosecution has miserably failed to prove that Shanti (since deceased) was ever harassed, maltreated or tortured by the appellants in connection with demand of dowry. He further argued that the prosecution has even failed to prove that the appellants ever made a demand of dowry either from Shanti or her parents or any other member of her family. He has referred to the FIR (Ex. P5) wherein there was no averment that anyone of the appellant ever demanded anything either from Shanti or her parents etc. In the FIR, it was mentioned that after ten days of the marriage of Shanti, when the complainant came to Guru Har Sahai to see her daughter, then his son-in-law, Kapil Kumar, demanded a jeep and in response thereof, the complainant replied that it was beyond his reach to give a jeep. It was also mentioned that Kapil Kumar then asked to send ten bags of sugar and thereafter ten bags of sugar and two tins of ghee were sent by him (complainant). It was further mentioned in the FIR that 10-12 days thereafter Miank Kumar, brother-in-law (Dewar) of his daughter, brought a letter scribed by Shanti to the complainant that 20 bags of sugar had been demanded by her in-laws, but the same demand could not be fulfilled since it was beyond his reach.
11. Thereafter, learned counsel for the appellants referred to the letter (Ex. P4). The same when translated into English runs as under:-
"my dear father, good morning. We are all fine here and pray for your welfare. Do not worry, I am quite Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 11 well here. Here I am not facing any difficulty. It is for further information that the work for which you had gone, whether the condition of Satpal has improved or not, reply immediately today itself. Please hand over the sugar to the brother. Don't worry about my side. The author of the letter is your lovely daughter Shanti Devi. Lot of Love to lovely father and brother. Your daughter, Shanti Devi. Send 20 bags of sugar, but don't refuse sugar to him (Aaye isko jawab na dena). I shall be thankful to you. You continue to visit to my place. Your loving daughter. Reply the letter today itself."
12. On the strength of the above letter, learned counsel submitted that the whole case of the prosecution with regard to demand of dowry and consequential harassment, has been totally demolished. The letter (Ex. P4) was produced by PW-3 Rulia Ram before the police and there is no dispute by the prosecution with regard to its existence. He has also referred to the deposition of PW3 Rulia Ram wherein he improved his statement to larger extent with regard to the demand of dowry and harassment. He has also referred to the cross-examination of PW-3 Rulia Ram where it does find mentioned that "I got recorded that the accused had demanded dowry at the time of settlement of marriage". Attention of the witness was drawn towards the FIR (Ex. P5) where this fact does not find mentioned. He further submitted that concededly appellant No. 1, Krishan Lal and PW-3, Rulia Ram, were Kiryana Marchants. Appellant No. 1 Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 12 was running his shop at Guru Har Sahai while the complainant, Rulia Ram, was having his shop at village Sadak and if for the sake of discussion, the improved statement of the complainant that the accused had demanded 20 bags of sugar is presumed to be correct, then the said demand would not fall within the ambit of demand of dowry. Apparently, the said demand, if made, was for sale of sugar at the shop of the appellants. It was contended that the articles demanded for the purpose of business cannot be termed as a demand of dowry. He also contended that whatever had been termed as demand of dowry, was made by Kapil Kumar, husband of the deceased. There is no specific averment in any of the documents available on record that the appellants had demanded a jeep, Rs. 50,000/-, ten bags of sugar and two tins of ghee or twenty bags of sugar. The allegation with regard to demand of twenty bags of sugar were general in nature while for rest of the articles, specific allegations were against Kapil Kumar, who was tried, convicted and sentenced by the learned Juvenile Justice Board. He further submitted that for the misdeeds of their co-accused, Kapil Kumar, the appellants cannot be held liable. He also submitted that the documents (Exs. D1 and D2); the receipts issued by PW4 Janak Raj, a Kiryana Marchent at Sadak, falsify the stand of the complainant side that ten bags of sugar and two tins of ghee as well as twenty bags of sugar were sent by PW-3 Rulia Ram. He further submitted that Shanti (since Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 13 deceased) was 21 years of age while Kapil Kumar, her husband, was 14 years of age at the time of marriage and, as such, their marriage could not be consummated and Shanti was upset on that account and due to the said reason only she committed suicide. On the basis of the above submissions, he prayed for acceptance of the appeal and acquittal of the appellants.
13. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the learned Trial Court after scanning the whole evidence has rightly held the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, IPC, and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years, besides payment of fine. He further submitted that specific instances of demand of dowry and cruelty were alleged. He had also argued that in their depositions, PW1 Dr. Manmohan Singh Dhillon and PW2 Dr. Ramesh Kumar had deposed that the death of Shanti had occurred on account of asphyxia due to strangulation. Therefore, presumption under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, should have been raised against the appellants for having committed the murder of Shanti and the learned Trial Court had wrongly acquitted the appellants for the said offence. Therefore, there is no substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants and by rejecting the same, the appeal be dismissed.
14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 14 record.
15. So far as the argument of the learned counsel for the State to the extent that the learned Trial Court has gone wrong in acquitting the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC, is concerned, it is suffice to say that the verdict of acquittal for the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC, has not been challenged by the respondent State. Even otherwise, it has nowhere emerged on the entire record, except from the medical evidence, that the appellants ever committed murder of Shanti by strangulating her. Therefore, the argument at this stage that the learned Trial Court has wrongly acquitted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC, is not tenable.
16. The material witnesses in the present case are PW3 Rulia Ram, the father of Shanti; PW5 Chhinder Kumar, brother of Shanti; PW4 Janak Raj, a neighbour of the shop of Rulia Ram; and PW10 Rajinder Kumar Goel, a Municipal Commissioner from Guru Har Sahai. In addition to the oral evidence, the prosecution has relied upon the letter (Ex. P4), which concededly was scribed by Shanti (since deceased). From the perusal of the said letter, which has been reproduced above, it is very much clear that Shanti (since deceased) was very happy at her matrimonial home. It was nowhere mentioned in the said letter that the appellants ever demanded anything from Shanti or from her Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 15 parents etc. She had repeatedly mentioned in the letter that she was quite well at her in-laws' house. From the perusal of the FIR, which was lodged on the basis of the statement of PW3 Rulia Ram, there was no specific allegation against the appellants that they ever demanded any dowry from Shanti (deceased) or her parents etc. Though during his deposition as PW3, Rulia Ram, did state that the appellants demanded a Jeep from him, but the said fact was duly confronted in his cross-examination from his previous statement. In his deposition, PW5 Chhinder Kumar had only deposed that they had given dowry in the marriage of Shanti (deceased) according to their capacity, but her in-laws used to demand more dowry and used to harass and beat her. The said allegations were general in nature. No specific demand or instance of any kind of harassment or beating was deposed. He did mention about the letter (Ex. P4), but, as has been said earlier, there was nothing adverse against the appellants in the said letter (Ex. P4). In the deposition of PW4 Janak Raj, it has come that the letter dated 2.5.1994 (Ex. P4) was produced by Rulia Ram, which was taken into possession by the police. He also deposed that the letter (Ex. P4) was scribed by Shanti. In the cross-examination, he admitted that Cash Memo. (Exs. D1 and D2) were issued from their shop.
17. So far as the statement of PW10 Rajinder Kumar Goel is concerned, he deposed that 5-10 months after the marriage, Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 16 Krishan Lal (appellant No. 1) had demanded sugar and ghee from the girl and the same was supplied by the father of the girl. With regard to other things, the allegations were general in nature. He also deposed that the appellants and their son, Kapil Kumar, came to him and made extra-judicial confession that they had burnt the daughter of Rulia Ram, but he failed to narrate on what date and what time the appellants went to him for confessing their guilt. He even failed to tell at what time and date the appellants and their co-accused were produced before the police. From his deposition, it cannot be believed that the appellants would go to him and confess their guilt because he not only failed to give the time and date of confession, but also failed to tell the time and date of the arrest of the appellants. In the statement (Ex. D3), i.e. the deposition of PW10 Rajinder Kumar Goel before the Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, he deposed that only Kapil Kumar had confessed his guilt for setting Shanti on fire. In the cross-examination, the witness was duly confronted with his statement suffered before the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board.
18. The essential constituents of Section 304-B, IPC, are as under:-
i. Death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances; and Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 17 ii. Such a death should have occurred within seven years of her marriage; and iii. 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 of dowry.
19. In Amar Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 2010 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 53, Hon'ble the Supreme Court held that demand of dowry by itself was not an offence for holding a person guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, IPC, unless the act of cruelty or harassment by the husband or the relative of the husband on the woman were established. It was further held that the prosecution witness who merely uses the word "harassed" or "tortured" and did not describe the exact conduct of the accused which, according to him, amounted to harassment or torture may not be believed by the Court in cases under Sections 498-A and 304-B, IPC.
20. In Surinder Kaur and another v. State of Haryana, 2004 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 140, Hon'ble the Supreme Court while dealing with a case for the offence punishable under Section 304-B, IPC, did not believe that young girls aged 18 and 16 years would go to the extent of beating the bride on account of demand of a Maruti Car.
21. In Naresh Kumar and another v. State of Haryana, 2006 Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 18 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 660, a Division Bench of this court held as under:-
" The case of Bhagti Devi, so far demand, cruelty and harassment are concerned, is distinguishable as that of appellant Naresh. She is mother-in-law of the deceased. The statements of PW.10 Mewa Devi, PW.11 Jai Bhagwan and PW.13 Jagdish are omnibus in relation to the harassment and mal-treatment by her. There are no specific instances attributed against her. She has nothing to do with the demand of motor- cycle, which is primarily for the use of accused Naresh. In Salamat Ali and others v. State of Bihar, 1977 SCC (Crl.) 842, it has been held that demand of scooter predominantly must have been raised by the husband. It cannot be expected that the father-in-law would be demanding a scooter for himself or that the mother-in-law needed it for her use and acquitted the father-in-law and mother-in-law and convicted the husband. Thus, following the ratio laid down in Salamat Ali's case (supra), Smt. Bhagti Devi deserves acquittal."
22. In the matter of Baldev Kaur and another v. State of Punjab, 2007 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 665, a Division Bench of this Court held as under:-
" The case of Baldev Kaur appellant, so far demand, cruelty and harassment is concerned, is distinguishable as that of appellant Ranjit Singh. She is mother-in-law of the deceased. The statements of PW4 Bahadur Singh and PW5 Gurmail Kaur are Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 19 omnibus in relation to the harassment and mal- treatment by her. There are no specific instances attributed against her. The tenor of the evidence of the said witnesses suggests that even at the time of marriage, there was a demand only by Raghbir Singh, father-in-law (now deceased) and even after the marriage when the deceased had visited her parental house, after 7-8 days, then Rs.8000/-, the amount of "Shagun" was given to her, who had further given the same to the appellant Ranjit Singh, who was accompanying her. In the last, the demand in clear terms was of Maruti Car. Baldev Kaur has nothing to do with the said demand, which is primarily for the use of accused Ranjit Singh. In Salamat Ali and others v. State of Bihar, 1977 SCC (Crl.) 842., it has been held that demand of scooter predominantly must have been raised by the husband. It cannot be expected that the father-in-law would be demanding a scooter for himself or that, the mother-in-law needed it for her use and acquitted the father-in-law and mother-in-law and convicted the husband. Thus, following the ratio laid down in Salamat Ali's case (supra), accused- appellant Baldev Kaur deserves acquittal."
23. In Sahib Singh and others v. State of Punjab, 2011 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 532 (P&H), it was held as under:-
" There is a common tendency on the part of the complainant party to give an exaggerated version of the incident and rope in all the family members. After death of bride, it is seen that the relations between parties become strained and false implication of all Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 20 family members of husband is generally resorted to. Therefore, the statements of Jit Singh, PW4, and Sukhwinder Singh, PW6, regarding the demand of dowry as well as maltreatment by appellants No. 2 and 3 do not seem to fit well in the facts of the present case as they would not have been the beneficiaries in case the demand had been met. The case of the prosecution becomes doubtful qua these appellants Anup Singh and Balbir Kaur."
24. Taking into consideration the ratio of the judgments cited herein above, it is clear that the prosecution has not only failed to substantiate that the appellants ever demanded anything from Shanti (deceased) or her parents, but also miserably failed to substantiate that Shanti (deceased) was ever meted with cruelty or harassment on account of demand of dowry. The letter (Ex. P4) has completely nullified the oral allegations levelled by the prosecution witnesses. Even otherwise, the demand of sugar bags or two tins of ghee cannot be termed as a demand of dowry. It is the conceded position that the appellants as well as PW3 Rulia Ram and his son PW5 Chhinder Kumar were kiryana merchants and they were selling sugar and ghee etc. The allegations of the prosecution were further contradicted from the cash memos (Exs. D1 and D2) to the effect that sugar bags and two tins of ghee were supplied by the complainant side. Perusal of Ex. D1 shows that three bags of sugar, at the rate of Rs. 1,370/- per bag, were purchased from Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-445-SB-2001 (O&M) 21 the shop of M/s Janak Raj and Sons, Sadak, District Faridkot, owned by PW4 Janak Raj. Similarly, Ex. D2 shows that seven sugar bags, at the rate of Rs. 1,300/- per bag, were also purchased from M/s Janak Raj and Sons, Sadak, District Faridkot. Therefore, it appears that after death of Shanti, the complainant side wanted to create evidence against the appellants and they wrongly averred that the sugar bags and two tins of ghee were supplied to the appellants' side on their demand of dowry.
25. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present appeal deserves acceptance and the same is hereby allowed. The appellants, Krishan Lal and Pushpa Rani, are acquitted of the charge punishable under Section 304-B read with Section 34, IPC. In case the appellants have deposited the fine, as imposed by the learned Trial Court, the same shall be refunded to them in accordance with the norms on the subject.
26. The Registry is directed to send back the lower court record forthwith along with a copy of this judgment.
(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE September 2, 2013 Pkapoor Kapoor Prashant 2013.09.07 13:53 I attest to the accuracy of this order