Delhi District Court
State vs ) Sachin on 9 June, 2022
IN THE COURT OF MS DEEPALI SHARMA :
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE 04: EAST DISTRICT
KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI
CNR No. DLET010001992014
SC No. 275/2016
FIR No. 456/2014
U/s 498A/304B/34 IPC
P.S. Kalyanpuri
State
versus
1) Sachin,
s/o Chotey Lal,
2) Ravi
s/o Chotey Lal,
3) Sunehri Devi
W/o Chotey Lal,
All r/o Village Baripura,
PS Shahbad, Distt. Badayun, UP.
4) Sunil,
s/o Chotey Lal,
5) Rakhi,
s/o Sunil Kumar,
SC No. 275/2016 Page 1 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi
Both r/o H.No. 159A,
Rajpur Extn., Chatarpur,
New Delhi68.
Date of Institution : 05.11.2014
Date of reserving Judgment : 08.06.2022
Date of pronouncement : 09.06.2022
Appearances
For the State : Shri. Santosh Kumar,
Learned Additional Public
Prosecutor.
For all the accused persons : Shri D.K.Singh, Advocate.
JUDGMENT
1. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that on 29.05.2014 information was received at PS Kalyanpuri regarding a PCR call at 9.52 am that suicide had been committed by a lady at F124, Gali No. 6, East Vinod Nagar, DD. No. 14A Ex. PW2/A was recorded in that regard and the said DD was marked to IO/ASI Lakhi Singh and then the same was entrusted to SI Sumit Kumar by the SHO. Accordingly, SI Sumit Kumar reached at the said address on the second floor of the house, where ASI Lakhi Singh was present alongwith Beat Official and SHO PS Kalyanpuri. One lady was found hanging from the ceiling fan with a chunni. Upon inquiry the name of the deceased was found to be Laxmi SC No. 275/2016 Page 2 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi @ Mamta, who was married one year back. The chunni was cut with a help of a knife and the lady was taken down and sent to LBS Hospital. The SDM was informed. IO/SI Sumit Kumar reached LBS Hospital and collected the MLC of Laxmi w/o Sachin vide MLC No. 8623/2014 wherein she was declared brought dead.
2. The Executive Magistrate Sh. R.K.Pandey, deputed by SDM, Mayur Vihar, reached LBS Hospital and recorded the statement of Rajender Kumar, father of the deceased, wherein he alleged that he got his daughter Laxmi married to Sachin in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals on 02.05.2013. There was no demand at the time of marriage. His daughter used to talk with Sachin after fixing of the marriage and Sachin demanded Rs. 2 Lacs at that time, which was fulfilled at the time of marriage alongwith other articles. His daughter was doing a private job and was earning about Rs. 43,000/ per month. She was working at Kunal Info Media, Tilak Nagar, Delhi.
3. After the marriage, his daughter used to reside at Dakshin Puri in a rented house, where his daughter's motherinlaw and brother inlaw used to reside alongwith them. 23 months after her marriage, his daughter told him that he should allow them to stay at his flat F124/C, Second Floor, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi, as it was lying empty and he gave to them to reside there. His daughter used to tell that her motherin SC No. 275/2016 Page 3 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi law used to trouble her. On 25.05.2014 he had gone with his wife to his daughter's house to invite them on the occasion of birthday of his grand child on 26.05.2014, where verbal altercation took place with his wife. Upon seeing the quarrels in the house, he had gone with his wife to see a place for his daughter so that there were no quarrels in her house. His daughter had collected some money from her job prior to her marriage in her account and she was pressurized to withdraw the said amount. His daughter had come to their house on 26.05.2014 and on 28.05.2014 she had come again and told them that she was being pressurized to get a cheque book issued of her account.
4. He (father of the deceased Laxmi) used to drive an auto and had gone for his work on 29.05.2014, at about 10.00 am, his son Manoj called him and told him that Laxmi @ Mamta was no more and asked him to return home quickly. Upon hearing that he reached his flat at East Vinod Nagar and saw that his daughter was hanging on the fan with a chunni. At that time, his son, wife and police was present there and his daughter was taken down after taking the photographs of the incident. The husband and motherinlaw of his daughter were not present there and when they called them, their phone was switched off. He suspected that his daughter had either been murdered or had been instigated to commit suicide, in which the motherinlaw, brotherinlaw and her SC No. 275/2016 Page 4 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi husband were involved. He called other relatives of his daughter, who did not pick up the phone i.e. her brotherinlaw and sisterinlaw, who used to reside at Chattarpur, who used to come occasionally and threatened his daughter. They may also be involved in the incident. The statement of Sh. Rajender Kumar, father of the deceased, recorded by the Executive Magistrate is Ex. PW4/A.
5. The statement of Smt. Roopwati, mother of the deceased, is Ex. PW3/A. In her statement recorded by the Executive Magistrate Ex. PW3/A, mother of the victim Smt. Roopwati alleged that at the time of marriage of her daughter with accused Sachin on 02.05.2013 they had given 15 Tola gold and Rs. 2 Lac cash, which were demanded by her daughter's brothersinlaw (Dewar & Jeth) and sisterinlaw (Jethani) and motherinlaw, out of which she had given 7 Tolas gold and Rs. 2 Lac cash out of her own free will. After four months of marriage, her daughter told her that her brothersinlaw (Dewar & Jeth) and sisterin law (Jethani) and motherinlaw used to tell her to get cash from her house. Previous day, when she met her daughter at Trilok Puri, in a queue at the dispensary, her daughter told that owing to the pressure from her inlaws, she had come to get a cheque book issued as her husband, brothersinlaw (Dewar & Jeth) and sisterinlaw (Jethani) and motherin law were demanding Rs. 2 Lacs from her account, which she had come to SC No. 275/2016 Page 5 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi get. Her daughter also told her that her inlaws were quarreling with her for last few days and her motherinlaw had also beaten her. She suspected that her daughter was murdered or she committed suicide upon instigation of her daughter's husband, brothersinlaw (Dewar & Jeth) and sisterinlaw (Jethani) and motherinlaw.
6. The IO made an endorsement on the statement of Sh. Rajender Kumar Ex. PW4/A and prepared a rukka Ex. PW21/A and an FIR was registered Ex. PW2/B. Postmortem of the body of the deceased was got conducted and the dead body was handed over to the parents and relatives of the deceased. The case property was handed over by ASI Lakhi Singh to the IO, which was seized by the IO and deposited in the malkhana. IO prepared the site plan and made further inquiries regarding the caller of the PCR call and recorded his statement. The husband and brotherinlaw (Devar) of the deceased were not found present at the spot. On 30.05.2014 accused Sachin and Ravi (brotherinlaw of deceased) surrendered at the PS and were arrested. Their personal search was conducted and disclosure statements were recorded. On 02.06.2014 mother of the deceased came to the PS and produced one cheque book in the name of deceased, which was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/D. The father and brother Manoj of the deceased produced photographs of the marriage, CDs of the marriage, original bills of dowry articles given at SC No. 275/2016 Page 6 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi the time of marriage, account statement of the bank account of the deceased and the same were seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW7/C to Ex. PW7/F respectively. The exhibits of viscera was sent to FSL Rohini for evaluation and analysis. On 15.06.2014 IO alongwith mother and brothers of the deceased reached at the place of incident and the house was searched and 21 dowry articles were seized and same were handed over to the mother of the deceased vide handing over memo Ex. PW3/E. One passbook of accused Sachin was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW6/B in which one entry dated 08.05.2013 was found regarding cash deposit of Rs. 2 Lacs after the marriage having taken place on 02.05.2013. Since accused Sunil brotherinlaw and Rakhi sisterinlaw of the deceased were not residing with the deceased and her husband, they were not arrested. The mother of the deceased also produced one document relating to operation of locker at Punjab National Bank in the name of her daughter Laxmi by which she had taken possession of some jewellery articles. The said document were seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex PW3/B. The scaled site plan was prepared. IO recorded the statement of witnesses and charge sheet was filed u/s 498A/304B/34 IPC against accused Sachin and Ravi; under Section 498A IPC against accused Sunil and Rakhi. Supplementary charge sheet was filed qua accused Sunahri Devi under Section 304B/498A/34 IPC.
SC No. 275/2016 Page 7 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi
7. After recording the statements of witnesses and upon completion of investigation, the charge sheet was filed by the IO u/s 498A/304B/34 IPC. After compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. the case was committed to this court.
8. On the basis of chargesheet and the documents submitted with it, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (East), Karkardooma Courts took cognizance of offences under Section 304B/498A/34 IPC and after complying with the provisions contained in Section 207 Cr.P.C, vide order dated 28.10.2014 committed the case to the Court of Session for 05.11.2014.
Charge
9. On 09.07.2015, after hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Ld. counsel for all the accused persons, charge was framed against all accused persons namely Sachin, Ravi, Sunil, Rakhi and Sunehri Devi for commission of offences punishable under Section 498A/304B/34 IPC. The charge so framed was read over and explained to all the accused persons to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
SC No. 275/2016 Page 8 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi Prosecution Evidence :
10. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined following witnesses.
(i) PW1: HC Gabbar Singh, MHC(M), who deposed about deposit of sealed pullandas containing case property of the case in the malkhana vide entries Ex. PW1/A and Ex. PW1/B. He also deposed about deposit of viscera box and FSL result in the malkhana vide entry Ex. PW1/C.
(ii) PW2: ASI Dinesh - Duty Officer, who recorded DD No. 14A Ex. PW2/A and registered the FIR Ex. PW2/B.
(iii) PW3 : Roopwati - mother of the victim.
(iv) PW4: Rajender Kumar - father of the victim. (v) PW5: SI Lakhi Singh - part of investigation, who went to
the spot alongwith other police officials and took the body of the deceased to LBS Hospital mortuary for post mortem. The doctor handed over the exhibits of the deceased to him, which were seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW5/A to PW5/C. SC No. 275/2016 Page 9 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi
(vi) PW6 : Ranjeet - brother of the deceased.
(vii) PW7 : Manoj Kumar - brother of the deceased. (viii) PW8: Sujeet Prakash - neighbour of the deceased Laxmi
and accused Sachin. His mobile phone was used to inform the police.
(ix) PW9: ASI Manoj Kumar - photographer with the Crime Team.
(x) PW10: SI Sanjay Saxena - Mobile Crime Team Incharge and he proved his SOC report is Ex. PW10/A.
(xi) PW11: Insp. Mahesh Kumar - Draftsman at Crime Branch.
He prepared the scaled site plan Ex. PW11/A.
(xii) PW12: Insp. Arvind Kumar - filed the charge sheet.
(xiii) PW13 : Rakesh Kumar Pandey Section Officer, DM Office, who was deputed by SDM Mayur Vihar on the date of incident . He recorded the statements of parents of deceased and issued directions to the SC No. 275/2016 Page 10 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi IO for sending the dead body for post mortem and for registration of the FIR.
(xiv) PW14: HC Deshpal - part of investigation. He went to LBS Hospital Mortuary for postmortem of the deceased. Viscera of the deceased was handed over by the doctor to the IO and seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW5/B and PW5/C. He was also involved in the arrest of accused Sachin and Ravi.
(xv) PW15: HC Rakesh. He took the exhibits from the MHC(M) and deposited them with FSL Rohini.
(xvi) PW16: Sh. M.L.Meena, Senior Scientific Officer (chemistry), FSL, Rohini, Delhi, who prepared FSL report of viscera vide Ex. PW16/A. (xvii) PW17: Const. Nivedita, who was posted at CPCR, PHQ, ITO, Delhi, and received information about the suicide by a lady at 9.43 am vide PCR form Ex. PW17/A. SC No. 275/2016 Page 11 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi (xviii) PW18: SI Mandan Gupta issued certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act regarding the PCR form vide Ex. PW18/A. (xix) PW19: W/HC Raj Kumari - part of investigation. She was involved in the arrest of accused Sunehri Devi.
(xx) PW20: Dr. Vinay Kumar Singh, Specialist Forensic Medicine, BJRM Hospital, Jahangir Puri, Delhi, who conducted the post mortem of the deceased vide post mortem report Ex. PW20/A and gave his opinion vide his subsequent report Ex. PW 20/B. (xxi) PW21: SI Sumit Kumar - IO of the case.
Statement of accused persons :
11. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, on 28.01.2020 statements of accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded wherein they denied the correctness of all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence against them and stated that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They pleaded that they had not demanded any dowry, however, one motorcycle, one gold chain, one gold ring and household articles were given by the parents of deceased SC No. 275/2016 Page 12 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi Vimlesh on their own.
12. It is contended by Ld. Counsel for the accused persons that there is no evidence on record to bring home the guilt against the accused persons. It is urged that the prosecution witnesses i.e. PW3 Roopwati, mother of the deceased; PW4 Rajender Kumar, father of the deceased; PW6 Ranjeet, brother of the deceased, and PW7 Manoj Kumar, brother of the deceased, have not supported the prosecution version regarding the allegations of dowry demand or harassment meted out to the deceased. It is urged that the victim was living separately with her husband since two to three months after her marriage with accused Sachin. No demand of dowry was ever made by the accused persons. It is urged that no amount was ever demanded by the accused persons from the deceased at any time after marriage and there is no evidence on record to show that any such demand was ever made. It is urged that accused Sunil and Rakhi never resided with accused Sachin and his wife Laxmi and were always living separately from them. It is accordingly urged that the accused persons are liable to be acquitted for the offences they are charged with.
13. On the other hand, it is contended by Ld. Addl.P.P. for the State that in the initial statement given to the SDM Ex. PW4/A and Ex. PW3/A, the parents of deceased have made categorical allegations of SC No. 275/2016 Page 13 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi dowry demand from the deceased by her inlaws. The deceased had died in unnatural manner after about one year of her marriage. The allegations of dowry demand are proved by Ex. PW4/E, which gives a list of articles which were given at the time of marriage and the bills in that regard were also seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW7/F. It is stated that photocopy of the bank passbook of the deceased was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW7/D. It is urged that the dowry articles given to the deceased were taken into possession by the mother of the deceased vide document Ex. PW3/C, which was seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/B. It is stated that PW3 has deposed that on 15.06.2014 she had identified the dowry articles as per list Ex. PW3/E, of her daughter at H. No. F124/C, Second Floor, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi, i.e. the place of incident where the deceased used to reside alongwith her husband. The said dowry articles were handed over to PW7 by the IO. It is urged that the aforesaid clearly indicates that there was dowry demand from the accused persons pursuant to which gold and other articles were given as dowry to the family of the accused persons and demands were subsequently made for Rs. 2 Lacs from the account of the deceased for which purpose she got issued a cheque book Ex. P1, indicating thereby that the dowry demand was made "soon before the death" of deceased Laxmi. It is urged that as per the statement of the parents of the deceased given to the SDM, the deceased had got issued the said cheque book only SC No. 275/2016 Page 14 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi 26.05.2014 as her inlaws were pressurizing her to withdraw Rs. 2 lacs from her account. It is accordingly urged that all the contents of Section 304B & Section 498A IPC are fulfilled in the present case and therefore, the accused persons are liable to be convicted for the offences they are charged with.
14. I have heard ld. Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Testimony of material witnesses:
15. The mother of the deceased, Smt. Roopwati was examined as PW3 and she deposed that her daughter was married to accused Sachin on 02.05.2013 according to Hindu rites and rituals. They had given about 7 Tola gold and Rs. 2 Lakh cash out of their own free will and none of the accused persons had demanded any dowry articles from them. After her marriage, her daughter Laxmi was residing happily at the house of accused persons. After her marriage whenever she used to come to their house, she used to tell that she was residing happily with her husband and inlaws. 34 months after marriage, PW3 told accused Sachin and daughter Laxmi to reside at their house at F124/C, Second Floor, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi, and at that time they were residing on rent at Paschim Vihar and they both started living there. Sometimes her mother SC No. 275/2016 Page 15 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi inlaw Sunehri Devi and accused Ravi (her brotherinlaw) used to visit at the said house and there also they were residing happily.
16. On 29.05.2014, at about 08.30 am, she was present at her home alongwith her children and her husband had gone to ply his auto, somebody called her telephonically from neighbourhood of her daughter Laxmi and accused Sachin and informed her son Manoj to come there immediately. Manoj told her about the same and she alongwith her son Manoj reached at H.No. F124/C, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi. After reaching there, she saw that many public persons had already gathered there. She went to the room of the said house and saw that her daughter Laxmi was hanging with a ceiling fan in the room and chunni was tied around her neck and the other end of the chunni was tied with the ceiling fan and that she was dead. Her son Manoj had called the police and some public person had also called the police. Police reached there and dead body of her daughter Laxmi was taken down by the police and it was sent to hospital. Her statement was recorded by the SDM concerned on 29.05.2014 and she had told only the said facts before the SDM . Her thumb mark was taken on said statement. She did not know why her daughter Laxmi committed suicide. Police had also interrogated her and she had told the said facts to the police also.
SC No. 275/2016 Page 16 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi
17. Sh. Rajender Kumar, father of the deceased Laxmi, was examined as PW4 and he deposed that deceased Laxmi, aged about 27 years, was his daughter, who was married with accused Sachin Kumar on 02.05.2013 according to Hindu rites and rituals. They had given dowry articles generally given in the marriage and he did not remember about the jewellery and cash given at the time of marriage. His wife would know better about the same. After the marriage, his daughter Laxmi was residing happily with her husband Sachin and her other inlaws i.e. motherinlaw Sunehri Devi, Devar etc. On 25.05.2014 he had gone to meet his daughter Laxmi at F124/C, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi, on the occasion of birthday of his grand son Surya. His daughter Laxmi alongwith her husband and her motherinlaw met him and he was welcomed by them and at that time also his daughter Laxmi had talked to him and told that she was living happily.
18. On 29.05.2014 he had gone to ply his TSR in Delhi and at about 09.30 am he was in the area of Connaught place, New Delhi, and his son Manoj informed him telephonically that Laxmi had expired and he was asked to come immediately. He immediately reached at F124/C, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi, and saw that at the second floor in a room, his daughter was hanging with ceiling fan and chunni was tied around her neck and the other end of the same was tied with ceiling fan. Many SC No. 275/2016 Page 17 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi public persons had gathered there and police was also present there. Dead body of his daughter was taken down after cutting the chunni and thereafter it was taken to LBS Hospital and he also accompanied to the hospital. In the hospital, post mortem was conducted and the dead body was handed over to them. He was called at the police station and Sh. R.K.Pandey, the SDM, concerned had recorded his statement, Ex. PW4/A and he had told the said facts to the SDM. He did not know if the chunni was taken into possession or not. Police had taken his signatures on some papers/ documents and he had signed the same without going through the same. He had identified dead body of his daughter in the hospital and his statement Ex. PW4/B was recorded He had also told said facts to the police and police recorded his statement. He did not know why his daughter Laxmi committed suicide. He identified the chunni of pink colour, which was seized by the police vide Ex. PW4/C as Ex. P2. He further stated that a portion of the chunni was also taken into possession in the hospital in the presence of SDM vide seizure memo Ex. PW4/D.
19. Ranjeet, brother of deceased Laxmi was examined as PW6 and he deposed that on 02.05.2013 his sister was married with accused Sachin according to Hindu rites and rituals. At the time of marriage, in laws of his sister Laxmi had not made any demand of dowry or cash. In the said marriage, his parents had given LED TV, some jewellery articles.
SC No. 275/2016 Page 18 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi He did not know if any acsh was given in the said marriage or not. After marriage, his sister Laxmi was living happily at her inlaws house. She never complained to him against the accused persons regarding any harassment or demand of dowry. On 29.05.2014 he was present in his office at Gurgaon and he received a call from his brother Manoj that some mishap had occurred with his sister Laxmi. He immediately rushed to the house where his sister alongwith her husband Sachin used to reside and he came to know that his sister Laxmi had already been taken to LBS Hospital. He reached the hospital where he came to know that his sister Laxmi had expired. After post mortem, dead body of her sister Laxmi was handed over to them for last rites. Later police had interrogated him. He did not know if his statement was recorded or not.
20. Manoj Kumar, brother of deceased Laxmi, was examined as PW7 and he also deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW6 Manoj. He deposed that on 02.05.213 his sister Laxmi (deceased) got married with accused Sachin according to Hindu Rites and Rituals. After some days of her marriage, she alongwith her accused Sachin and Ravi had started residing at Flat No. F124C, Second Floor, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi, and she was living happily with them. She had never made any complaint either to him or his parents and brother against the accused persons regarding harassment and demand of dowry. On 29.05.2014 at SC No. 275/2016 Page 19 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi about 09 am he received a telephonic call from the owner of H.No. F124, Ground Floor, East Vinod Nagar, that his sister Laxmi had committed suicide. He reached at flat of his sister and saw that his sister Laxmi was hanging in the room and a chunni was tied around her neck and other side of the chunni was tied with the ceiling fan. He identified dead body of his sister Laxmi in the LBS Hospital and his statement regarding the same was recorded in the presence of Sh. R.K.Pandey, Executive Magistrate, Ex. PW7/A.
21. Accused persons have been charged for offences under section 304B/34 IPC and Section 498A/34 IPC. The offence of Dowry Death has been dealt with in section 304B IPC and it provides as under:
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.
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 SC No. 275/2016 Page 20 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi but which may extend to imprisonment for life.
22. Thus in order to prove an offence under Section 304B, the following ingredients must be proved :
(i) death of a woman must have been caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances
(ii) such death must have occurred within seven years of her marriage
(iii) and soon before her death, woman must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband
(iv) such cruelty or harassment must be for or in connection with the demand of dowry.
Hence, all the ingredients of Section 304B IPC ought to be fulfilled in order to arrive at a finding of guilt against the accused persons under the said provision.
23. In the present case, the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with accused Sachin on 02.05.2013. Deceased Laxmi passed SC No. 275/2016 Page 21 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi away on 29.05.2014. She therefore died after one year and 27 days of her marriage. The death accordingly occurred within seven years of marriage of deceased Laxmi.
24. As regards the cause of death of deceased Laxmi, PW3 has deposed that on 29.05.2014 at about 08.30 am, a telephone call was received from neighbour of her daughter Laxmi and her son Manoj was informed to come immediately and thereafter they reached H.No.F124/C, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi. After reaching there, she saw that many public persons had already gathered there. She reached in the room of the said house and saw that her daughter Laxmi was hanging with a ceiling fan in the room and chunni was tied around her neck and the other end of the chunni was tied with the ceiling fan and she was dead. Her son Manoj had called the police and somebody from the public persons had also called the police. In this regard PW8, Sujeet Prakash, neighbour of accused Sachin and deceased Laxmi deposed that on 29.05.2014 at about 09.30 - 10.00 am upon hearing some noise he came out and heard from the people present around that a lady on the second floor house, where accused Sachin, his wife Laxmi and brother Ravi were living, had committed suicide. Some public persons informed the police using his mobile phone. Mother of the victim PW3 further deposed that police had reached there and dead body of her daughter Laxmi was taken down by SC No. 275/2016 Page 22 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi the police and it was sent to hospital. Her statement was recorded by the SDM concerned on 29.05.2014 and she had told only the said facts before the SDM. Her thumb mark was taken on said statement. She did not know why her daughter Laxmi committed suicide.
25. PW4, PW6 & PW7 have also deposed that when they reached at F124/C, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi, they saw that Laxmi was hanging with ceiling fan and chunni was tied around her neck and the other end of the same was tied with ceiling fan. Police was also present there. Dead body of Laxmi was taken down after cutting the chunni and thereafter it was taken to LBS Hospital, where the post mortem was conducted and the dead body was handed over to them.
26. Laxmi was declared brought dead at the LBS Hospital vide MLC No. 8623/2014.
27. The deceased was taken to LBS Hospital, Khichripur, for her postmortem, which was conducted by PW20 Dr. Vinay Kumar Singh on 29.05.2014, who deposed that upon postmortem examination vide Ex. PW20/A following injuries were found on the body of the deceased :
SC No. 275/2016 Page 23 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi Ligature mark of size 24x12.5 cm present over upper part of neck, 2 cm. Below right ear, 5.5 cm below chin and 6 cm below left ear, firm and oblique.
The internal examination revealed that in lungs petechieal hemorrhage over fissral aspect was found . He volunteered that it was one of the characters of case of asphyxia.
Time since death was deposed to be about 818 hours.
28. The FSL report is Ex. PW16/A, as per which metallic poisons, ethyl and methyl alcohol, cyanide, phosphide, alkaloids, barbiturates, tranquilizers and pesticides could not be detected in Ex. '1A' (stomach and pieces of small intestine), '1B' (pieces of liver, spleen and kidney) & '1C'(blood sample).
29. After going through the FSL report, PW20 opined that death was caused due to asphyxia due to antemortem hanging vide his subsequent opinion Ex. PW20/B. He also identified the chunni, which was found around the neck of dead body as Ex. P2.
SC No. 275/2016 Page 24 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi 30 . From the above it is evident that the cause of death of
deceased Laxmi was asphyxia due to antemortem hanging and there were no other external injuries on the body of deceased except ligature mark on her neck. It is also deposed by PW5 SI Lakhi Singh that the room in which the body of deceased was found, was locked from inside. The police team had broken the door of the said room. In this regard, the IO PW21 deposed that the latch of the room from inside was already broken when he reached the spot indicating thereby that the room was broken open being locked from inside. The aforesaid facts prove that the victim had committed suicide by hanging. Hence, she died an unnatural death.
31. It is now to be seen as to whether the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any of relative of her husband in connection with demand for dowry. It is also to be shown as to whether such cruelty and harassment was made 'soon before her death' in order to fall within the parameters of Section 304B IPC relating to Dowry Death.
32. The Explanation to section 304B provides that "dowry" shall have the same meaning as in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, SC No. 275/2016 Page 25 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi 1961 (28 of 1961). Section 2 of Dowry Prohibition Act defines dowry to mean any property or valuable security given/agreeing to give by one party of the marriage to the other party at or before or any time after marriage in connection with the marriage of the said parties.
33. In the present case PW3 has deposed that about 7 Tola gold and Rs. 2 Lakhs in cash were given out of their own free will at the time of marriage and no demand was made from the side of accused persons. Similarly, PW4 father of the deceased deposed that they had given dowry articles generally given in marriage and he did not remember about the jewellery and cash given at the time of marriage. PW6 brother of the deceased deposed that at the time of marriage no demand for dowry was made by the inlaws of his sister and his parents had given an LED TV, some jewellery articles. However, he did not know if any cash was given in the marriage.
34. Accordingly, PW3 has deposed about giving of 7 Tola gold and Rs. 2 Lacs in cash at the time of marriage, however, there is no statement regarding the same by the other witnesses. It is also noteworthy that as per the testimony of PW3 she had handed over a letter issued by PNB Bank Ex. PW3/C to the IO, which was seized by the IO vide seizure SC No. 275/2016 Page 26 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi memo Ex. PW3/B, on which the jewellery articles in locker no. 303 PNB Block No. 5, Trilok Puri, were received by her as it was the jewellery given by her at the time of marriage. The list of dowry articles were identified by PW3 at H.No. F124/C, Second Floor, East Vinod Nagar, vide Ex. PW3/E.
35. As discussed hereinabove, dowry includes giving or agree to give any property or valuable security "in connection with the marriage of the parties". Accordingly, the articles i.e. gold and other household articles given at the time of marriage fall under the definition of dowry as provided under Section 2 of Dowry Prohibition Act. However, the prosecution witnesses have categorically deposed that there was no demand for dowry from the accused persons and they had given gold, cash and other articles out of their own free will at the time of marriage.
36. For the purposes of Section 304B IPC, it is also required to be proved that the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband in connection with demand for dowry and that such cruelty or harassment was made "soon before her death".
SC No. 275/2016 Page 27 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi
37. The accused persons have also been charged for the offence u/s 498A/34 IPC. Section 498A IPC is reproduced as under for ready reference :
498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation For the purpose of this section, "Cruelty" means
(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
38. In the present case, no assertion has been made by either PW3 - mother of the victim, PW4 - father of the victim, PW6 & PW7 - brothers of the victim regarding any harassment or cruelty relating to any demand for dowry with the deceased victim. Infact PW3 deposed that her daughter was residing happily alongwith her husband and inlaws and 34 months after marriage, her daughter alongwith her husband accused Sachin shifted to F124/C, Second Floor, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi. Sometimes her motherinlaw Sunehri Devi and accused Ravi (brotherin SC No. 275/2016 Page 28 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi law) of deceased Laxmi used to visit the said house.
39. PW4 also did not depose regarding any illtreatment, cruelty or harassment meted out to his daughter by the accused persons and he also stated that after marriage, his daughter Laxmi was residing happily with her husband Sachin and other inlaws i.e. motherinlaw Sunehri Devi and Devar(brotherinlaw) Ravi. PW6 and PW7 also deposed that their sister was living happily with her inlaws and that she never complained against the accused persons regarding any harassment or demand for dowry.
40. It is alleged by the prosecution that the inlaws of deceased Laxmi were pressurizing her to withdraw Rs. 2 Lakhs from her account and to get a cheque book issued for the said purpose. The said fact was told to PW3 by deceased Laxmi one day before she passed away, when PW3 had gone to the dispensary at Trilokpuri with her grandson where she met her daughter i.e. deceased Laxmi. PW3 affirmed the suggestion of Ld. Addl.P.P. for the State in her crossexamination that she had handed over one sealed envelop of SBI Bank containing cheque book of her daughter Laxmi, which was received by her through Dak on 31.05.2014 at her house and that the same was taken into possession vide SC No. 275/2016 Page 29 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi seizure memo Ex. PW3/D. The cheque book is Ex. P1. It is urged by Ld. Addl.P.P. for the State that the fact that the said cheque book Ex. P1 was received on 31.05.2014 corroborates the version of mother of the victim in her initial statement recorded by the SDM Ex. PW3/A, wherein she had stated the above said fact. It is however pertinent to note that during her examinationinchief the mother of the victim did not state anything regarding the said fact and also denied the suggestion regarding the same when she was crossexamined by Ld. Addl.P.P. for the State regarding her daughter telling that she was being pressurized by her in laws to withdraw Rs. 2 Lakhs from her account or that she was getting a cheque book issued for the said purpose. In this regard the father of the deceased, PW4 also denied that his daughter was being pressurized by the accused persons for withdrawing the money from her account. In these circumstances the sole fact that the cheque book of the deceased was received by PW3 would not however be sufficient to connect the accused persons with the offence in issue as the reason for issuance of the cheque book has been categorically denied by the parents of the deceased in their testimony recorded before the court. PW3 deposed that she had stated to the SDM, the version as given by her in her examinationinchief and that her thumb impression was taken on Ex. PW3/A. Father of the deceased PW4 deposed that his statement Ex. PW4/A was not read over to him by the SDM concerned after it was recorded and that he had stated before the SC No. 275/2016 Page 30 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi SDM what he had stated before the court. Hence, the parents and brothers of the deceased resiled from their statements given during investigation and despite crossexamination at length by the Ld. Addl.P.P. for the State they stuck to their version as given in their examinationin chief that deceased Laxmi was not subjected to cruelty or harassment by the accused persons. Essentially they denied the case of the prosecution. The testimony of the other witnesses is incidental and relates to various aspects of investigation.
41. In their crossexamination by Ld. Counsel for the accused persons, the above said witnesses reiterated that no complaint was made by deceased Laxmi against the accused persons regarding harassment or demand for dowry or cash by the accused persons.
42. The basic principle of criminal law is that the prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. However, the prosecution could not pass the said test in the present case in view of the testimony of the PW3, PW4, PW6 and PW7 who being the material witnesses failed to support the prosecution case and in fact deposed that deceased Laxmi was living happily with her inlaws and that she never complained against the accused persons regarding any harassment or demand for dowry.
SC No. 275/2016 Page 31 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi
43. Accordingly, none of the material prosecution witnesses namely the mother PW3, father PW4, brothers PW6 and PW7 have supported the prosecution version as regards any harassment or cruelty meted out to deceased Laxmi in connection with any demand for dowry or otherwise. Hence, in absence of any allegation of harassment or cruelty being proved on record, all the accused persons namely Sachin, Ravi, Sunil, Rakhi and Sunehri Devi are acquitted of the charged offences under section 304B IPC and section 498A IPC read with section 34 IPC. Their bail bonds stand cancelled and sureties are discharged.
44. After compliance of necessary formalities, file be consigned to Record Room.
order
Digitally signed by
DEEPALI DEEPALI
SHARMA
Announced in the open Court SHARMA Date: 2022.06.10
16:35:06 +0530
on this 9th day of June, 2022
(Deepali Sharma)
Additional Sessions Judge04
East District/KKD Courts/Delhi.
SC No. 275/2016 Page 32 of 32 ASJ04/KKD/Delhi