Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1066 (PNJ)

Krishan Kumar v. State of Haryana

2003-08-05

AMAR DUTT, V.M.JAIN

body2003
JUDGMENT V.M. Jain, J. - This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 9/13/9.1995, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, convicting the accused appellant under Sections 304-B and 498-A Indian Penal Code, and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code and also to undergo RI for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for 6 months under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code and directing the substantive sentences to run concurrently. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 8.2.1993 at 4.30 P.M. Bhagwan Singh, PW made statement Ex.PB before ASI Sharni Ram at Bus Stand Mirzapur. It was alleged in the said statement that he was working as a Block Officer in the Forest Department at Adampur and had 5 children including three daughters and two sons. It was alleged that his eldest daughter Asha Rani, deceased aged 19 years was married in July or September 1989 with accused Krishan Kumar. It was alleged that from the very day of marriage, his daughter Asha Rani was being taunted by her mother-in-law Smt. Chandro Devi, father-in-law Phool Singh, her Jeth Satbir Singh and her husband Krishan Kumar for bringing less dowry, saying that her father roams about on a motorcycle but cannot give a scooter to his son-in-law. It was alleged that he had told his daughter that she should tell her in-laws that he was a poor man and he had given sufficient dowry according to his capacity and that he was not in a position to give scooter to them but they continued harassing his daughter. It was alleged that 4 months back his daughter had visited their house at Bhattu Kalan and at that time his son-in-law accused Krishan Kumar had come to leave her. It was alleged that at that time accused Krishan Kumar had made his demand before him and his wife Sunehri Devi that either a scooter or a plot should be given to him otherwise he would harass their daughter. It was alleged that at that time accused Krishan Kumar had made his demand before him and his wife Sunehri Devi that either a scooter or a plot should be given to him otherwise he would harass their daughter. It was alleged that on 4.2.1993, his son-in-law, accused Krishan Kumar had come to their house at Bhattu Kalan and had told his wife Smt. Sunehri Devi that they had not arranged any scooter or plot for him and that if they would not arrange a scooter or plot for him, then their daughter would not remain alive. It was alleged that thereupon his wife had promised to give a plot or scooter to accused Krishan Kumar and thereafter he had taken their daughter with him from Bhattu Kalan to Niyana, on the previous day at about 11 a.m. It was alleged that on that day i.e. on 8.2.1993, at about 9 or 10 a.m. accused Satbir Singh (Jeth) alongwith 4-5 other persons came to him and told that his daughter was seriously ill and that he had been called there, whereupon his younger brother Ved Parkash, his uncle Shammi Nath, his wife Smt. Sunehri Devi alongwith 3-4 other persons had accompanied him and they had reached Village Niyana and on reaching there, they found that his daughter Asha Rani was lying dead. It was alleged that accused Krishan Kumar, accused Phool Singh, accused Chandro Devi and accused Satbir Singh had murdered his daughter for the lust of dowry and that action be taken against them. After recording the statement Ex.PB made by Bhagwan Singh, ASI Sharni Ram sent the same to the police station with his endorsement Ex.PB/1, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PB/2 under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 34 Indian Penal Code was registered in PS Sadar Hisar at 5.10. a.m. on 8.12.1993. 2. After registration of the FIR, the case was investigated by the police, inquest proceedings were held, post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased was conducted, accused were arrested in this case and after completion of the investigation challan was submitted in the court. Learned Additional Sessions Judge charged all the accused i.e. accused Krishan Kumar, Satbir Singh, Phool Singh and Smt. Chandro Devi under Sections 498-A and 304-B Indian Penal Code, to which charges all the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined its witnesses. Learned Additional Sessions Judge charged all the accused i.e. accused Krishan Kumar, Satbir Singh, Phool Singh and Smt. Chandro Devi under Sections 498-A and 304-B Indian Penal Code, to which charges all the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined its witnesses. Thereafter the statements of the accused under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code were recorded in which they denied the prosecution allegations against them and stated that they were innocent and had been falsely implicated in this case. Accused Krishan Kumar stated that his brother Satbir Singh accused, his father Phool Singh and mother Smt. Chandro Devi accused used to live separately. He stated that he was having cordial relations with his wife and stated that his wife had died natural death. He stated that he was employed as a Jawan with Central Reserve Police Force and used to come to his house once or twice in a year for few days only and for most of the time his wife used to stays with her parents. He stated that he and his co-accused who were falsely implicated in this case. Similar statements were made by the other co-accused and they stated that they never made any demand for dowry etc., nor they even harassed the deceased. The accused, however, did not produce any evidence in their defence. After hearing both sides and after perusing the record, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted all the other three accused namely Satbir Singh, Phool Singh and Smt. Chandro Devi of the charges framed against them, but convicted and sentenced the accused appellant namely Krishan Kumar (Husband) for the charges under Sections 304-B and 498-A Indian Penal Code and sentenced him as referred to above vide judgment and order dated 9/13.9.1995. Aggrieved against the same, accused Krishan Kumar filed the present appeal in this court. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the accused appellant submitted before us that the accused appellant was employed as a Sepoy in Central Reserve Police Force and that nothing has come on the record to show that the accused appellant was on leave or otherwise on the day of the occurrence and was available at his village i.e. Village Niyana at the time of occurrence. However, we find no merit in this submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. If accused Krishan Kumar was taking the plea of alibi, in our opinion, it was for him to produce cogent evidence on record to show that in fact he was not available in the village at the time of occurrence. No such evidence was led by the accused appellant in this regard. On the other hand, in reply to question No. 24 put to him under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code, accused appellant Krishan Kumar stated that he and his other co-accused were arrested by the police from their house on 8.2.1993 and they were falsely implicated in this case. Thus, as per his own statement under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code, accused appellant Krishan Kumar was admitting his presence at his house on 8.2.1993 and occurrence in this case had also taken place on 8.2.1993. Thus it could not be said that accused appellant Krishan Kumar was not available in his village Niyana at the time of occurrence. 5. It was then submitted by the learned counsel for the accused appellant that according to PW-1 Dr. Suman Menon, blood was coming out from the mouth and nose of the deceased at the time of post mortem examination on 9.2.1993, yet in the inquest report Ex.PA/1, prepared by ASI Sharni Ram on 8.2.1993 itself, he had mentioned that there was no blood oozing out or otherwise. However, we find no force in this submission as well of the learned counsel for the accused appellant. PW-1 Dr. Suman Menon had deposed during cross examination that it was correct that blood in the mouth and nose of the patient could have been caused even in the transit after the death had taken place and that there was no mark of injury on the nose and mouth of Asha Rani, deceased. Thus the presence of blood coming out from the mouth and nose of the deceased at the time of post mortem examination stands explained and would not create any doubt with regard to the case of the prosecution. 6. It was then submitted before use by the learned counsel for the accused appellant that it was not proved on the record that the deceased had died unnatural death. However, we find no force in this submission as well of the learned counsel for the accused appellant. 6. It was then submitted before use by the learned counsel for the accused appellant that it was not proved on the record that the deceased had died unnatural death. However, we find no force in this submission as well of the learned counsel for the accused appellant. PW-1 Dr. Suman Menon alongwith Dr. RS Bishnoi had conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 9.2.1993. It was found that the deceased was having contusion on the right side of the face just above the lower margin of the mandible and on dissection there was blood and the seat of injury was 3 cm. away from the right ear. The deceased was having another contusion on the neck below the lateral to the middle of lower margin of the right mandible but there was no blood on dissection. They also found that the upper chest, upper parts of the arm with face and back were all congested. Bluish colour of the nails was found on the right hand whereas on the left hand there was nail polish. No mark of injury was seen on the fundal height. It was found that she was pregnant and was having foetus of 26 weeks in the womb. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death was asphyxia due to smothering which was ante mortem in nature and was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Dr. Suman Menon denied the suggestion given to him (her ?) on behalf of the accused that the deceased in this case had died natural death. 7. From the medical evidence referred to above, in our opinion, it stands fully proved on the record that the deceased had died an unnatural death due to asphyxia. Her dead body was found from the room of the accused appellant. No explanation whatsoever, has come on the record to show as to under what circumstances the unnatural death of deceased Smt. Asha Rani had taken place. Instead of explaining the circumstances under which Smt. Asha Rani deceased had died, accused Krishan Kumar in his statement under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code had stated that he had cordial relations with his wife and that in fact his wife had died natural death. Instead of explaining the circumstances under which Smt. Asha Rani deceased had died, accused Krishan Kumar in his statement under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code had stated that he had cordial relations with his wife and that in fact his wife had died natural death. This part of the statement made by accused appellant Krishan Kumar is contrary to the medical evidence proved on record, which clearly proves that Smt. Asha Rani died an unnatural death. 8. Learned counsel for the accused appellant then submitted before us that the involvement of the accused appellant in the death of Smt. Asha Rani is not proved on the record. However, we find no force in this submission as well of the learned counsel for the accused appellant. The statements of PW2 Bhagwan Singh (father and complainant) and PW-3 Smt. Sunehri Devi (mother) would clearly prove the involvement of the accused appellant in the crime. PW2 Bhagwan Singh had categorically stated that about 4 months prior to her death accused Krishan Kumar had left Asha Rani at her parental house and at that time accused Krishan Kumar had made demand for scooter or plot from his and his wife and in case the demand for plot or scooter was not fulfilled, he would go on harassing Asha Rani, deceased. He further deposed that on 4.2.1993 again accused Krishan Kumar had made demand for plot or scooter and in case the demand was not met he would kill Asha Rani. It was alleged that at that time accused Krishan Kumar was assured that his demand would be fulfilled within 6 months. He further deposed that on 7.2.1993 at about 11 a.m. accused Krishan Kumar had taken away Asha Rani with him to his village Niyana. He further deposed that on 8.2.1993 accused Satbir Singh had come to him at about 9 or 10 a.m. and had told him that Asha Rani was seriously ill and thereupon when he reached the house of the accused in Village Niyana, he found that Asha Rani was lying dead on the double bed on the first floor. Similar statement was made by PW-3 Smt. Sunehri Devi, mother of the deceased. Both these witnesses were cross-examined at length but nothing could be elicited from them which could create a doubt about the prosecution story. Similar statement was made by PW-3 Smt. Sunehri Devi, mother of the deceased. Both these witnesses were cross-examined at length but nothing could be elicited from them which could create a doubt about the prosecution story. Both the witnesses categorically stated about the demand made by the accused and the harassment of the deceased by the accused soon before her death. In our opinion, from the evidence led by the prosecution it stands fully proved on the record that the accused appellant was responsible for the death of the deceased and that he was rightly convicted and sentenced by the learned trial court. This is especially so when all the ingredients of dowry death detailed in Section 304-B Indian Penal Code are fully proved in this case. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the accused appellant submitted before us that the sentence awarded to the accused appellant was on the higher side and that leniency may be shown to him on the question of sentence. However, we find no force in this submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, in our opinion, learned trial court was perfectly justified in sentencing the accused appellant to life imprisonment and no case for showing any leniency is made out. In view of the above, finding no merit in this appeal the same is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.