Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Raman Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 24 April, 2009
Next submission of learned defence counsel for the appellants
was that there are contrary statements and number of improvements in the
statements of Balwan Singh and Bal Kishan. When material improvements,
then story is to be ignored. In support of this contention, learned defence
counsel for the appellants cited 2009(2) RCR (Crl.) 851, Raman Kumar vs.
State of Punjab, but in the above cited authority, 75% burn injuries were
noticed. Father of the deceased reported to the police that deceased being
Crl.Appeal No. 1175-SB of 1999 15
fed up from her in-laws, poured kerosene on herself and finished her life,
but in Court, stated that deceased told him in the hospital that she was
caught hold by her husband and brother-in-law, then kerosene was poured
by her mother-in-law and she was set on fire by her husband. History sheet
maintained by the doctor showed that deceased stated categorically that
when she tried to ignite gas stove, then she caught fire accidentally. Letter
was written by the deceased to her parents but in the letter, no reference of
dowry, then story was discarded. But in the present case, no material
improvements. Minor discrepancies with the passage of time. From the
very beginning, case of the prosecution was that six months after the
marriage when Kelo Devi came to her parental house, then told the
complainant that appellants used to misbehave and maltreat her for want of
dowry. They were demanding motorcycle. Few days earlier to the
occurrence, again Kelo Devi had brought to the notice of the complainant
party regarding demand of motorcycle. No letter before the present
occurrence because Kelo Devi was not literate. She cannot write or read.
Earlier to the occurrence, Kelo Devi brought to the notice of the
complainant that appellants used to misbehave and maltreat her for want of
dowry. Then complainant had gone to the house of the appellants with a
request not to harass Kelo Devi for want of dowry. When married girl
informed the parents that she is being harassed for want of dowry by her in-
laws, then sometimes to save the marriage, matter is not brought to the
notice of panchayat or police. An effort is made by the parents to request
the in-laws not to harass the girl for want of dowry. Similarly in the present
case, when Kelo Devi reported to the complainant that appellants were
misbehaving and maltreating her for want of dowry, then he had contacted
Crl.Appeal No. 1175-SB of 1999 16
the appellants with a request not to misbehave and maltreat the deceased for
want of dowry. No doubt, on 5.6.1998, appellants along with some other
persons came to the village of complainant to attend pagri ceremony of
Singh Ram, father of Bal Kishan, but if at that time, there was no protest by
the complainant party, then story is not to be ignored. Suppose, there was
no complaint by the deceased and deceased was enjoying married life at her
in-laws house, then without any reason, there was no reason to commit
suicide. As per doctor, deceased was pregnant but suggestion to the doctor
was that she was not pregnant. Suppose, she was not pregnant, even then
no reason to commit suicide, when there was no complaint that she was
under depression or she was suffering from any serious ailment. Within
1-1/2 years after the marriage, when deceased was hale and hearty and was
not suffering from any serious ailment, then without any reason, there was
no idea to commit suicide, particularly when doctor stated that symptoms of
suicide were not noticed. Theory of suicide not reasonable when dead
body was found lying on the double bed in the chobara and no explanation
who had brought down the dead body to the floor from the ceiling fan.
Occurrence was during day time. If appellants were not present in the
house at the time of occurrence, then any member of the family could easily
be produced in defence to state that he or she was present when deceased
had committed suicide. Then, intimation was given to the police or
complainant party.
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Nachhatar Singh Saggu And Ors. vs The State Of Punjab And Ors. on 7 September, 1995
In 2004(4) RCR (Crl.) 580, Nachhatar Singh and others vs.
State of Punjab, under Section 304-B IPC, accused were acquitted on the
Crl.Appeal No. 1175-SB of 1999 12
ground that none of the PWs stated as to when, in which year, date and
month, any act of cruelty in connection with demand of dowry was
committed. No specific instance in that regard and regarding demand of
dowry and cruelty, no complaint was made to the police or any other
responsible officer.
1