Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1420 (PNJ)

Satwinder Singh Alias Kala v. State Of Punjab

2009-08-17

MAHESH GROVER

body2009
Judgment MAHESH GROVER, J. 1. This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 1.2.2003 of the Additional sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Fast Track Court, hoshiarpur (hereinafter described as the trial court) whereby the appellant was convicted under Sec.304-B of the I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- and In default of payment of the fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month, The appellant along with his mother-Kamlesh Kaur were setup to face trial by the Station House Officer, Police station, Mukerian in a case registered vide f. I. R. No.58 dated 18.5.2001 under Sections 302, 304-B and 34 of the I. P. C. on the basis of the statement of Rajinder Pal Singh, father of deceased- Kamalpreet Kaur. It was alleged by the complainant that on 19.2.2000, the deceased was married to the appellant and at that time, sufficient dowry articles were given. However, the appellant, his mother and sister-in-law (Bharjai) started maltreating the deceased for bringing fewer dowries. 2. They also demanded money for the appellant from her parents for opening a car garage and when this demand was not met, she was given beatings by him, as a result of which pregnancy of 3-4 months was terminated. Harbaljit Singh, Maasar of the deceased and his wife-Harbhajan Kaur, who were the mediators in the marriage and were residing near the house of the appellant, intervened and got the matter compromised. Thereafter, the appellant and his mother did not allow the deceased to visit her parents and also restrained her from moving out of the house. On 16.5.2001, the mother of the deceased fell ill and a telephonic message was given to the appellant for sending her and after great persuasions, she was taken to jalandhar. The deceased wanted to stay back, but the appellant did not allow her to do so. 3. On 18.5.2001, Rattan Kaur, mother of harbaljit Singh gave a message on telephone to the complainant that the deceased was admitted in Civil Hospital, Mukerian. He along with other family members immediately rushed to the hospital where he found his daughter lying dead. At that time, she was about four months pregnant. There were injury marks on the neck of the deceased. The matter was reported to the police. He along with other family members immediately rushed to the hospital where he found his daughter lying dead. At that time, she was about four months pregnant. There were injury marks on the neck of the deceased. The matter was reported to the police. After the post mortem, the cause of death came to be established as "hanging leading to asphyxia". After completion of necessary investigation, the appellant and his mothers were challenged by the police. They were charge sheeted by the trial Court under Sec.304-B of the I. P. C. On appraisal of the entire evidence on record, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner mentioned hereinabove, but acquitted his mother. This has resulted in the filing of the instant appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the offence under Section 304-B of the I. P. C. does not stand established from the evidence on record. He further contended that there is no evidence regarding the demand of dowry and the testimony of pw1-Rajinder Pal Singh (complainant) and pw2-Harbaljit Singh, who is a close relation of the deceased (Maasad) does not reveal that any demand of dowry was ever raised upon the family of the complainant which led to her death. It was submitted that the testimony of the Investigating Officer -Inspector Jagir Singh, who appeared as PW4 also shows that the complainant did not submit any list of dowry articles and there is no evidence on record from where it can be inferred that such demands were ever raised. That apart, he referred to the statement of PW1 wherein he has stated that the police had conducted an enquiry in which the allegations of demand of dowry were found to be incorrect and the dispute inter se between the appellant and the deceased was only relating to temperament. On the basis of these contentions/ submissions, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the conviction and sentence of the appellant deserve to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, iearned counsel for the respondent-State contended that since the death had taken place within seven years of the marriage, the presumption of law is directly attracted against the appellant. On the basis of these contentions/ submissions, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the conviction and sentence of the appellant deserve to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, iearned counsel for the respondent-State contended that since the death had taken place within seven years of the marriage, the presumption of law is directly attracted against the appellant. He further contended that since there is overwhelming evidence on record to show that the appellant and his family members had raised demand of dowry upon the complainant, which conduct had led to the death of the deceased, there is no escape from the conclusion which has been arrived atby the trial Court. I have thoughtfully considered the rival contentions and have gone through the record. The prosecution, in order to establish the case against the appellant, has primarily relied upon the statements of PW1-Rajinder Pal Singh and pw2-Harbaljit Singh. If the testimony of these two witnesses is to be perused, then it reveals that probably no articles of dowry were ever given during the course of marriage. PW1 categorically stated in his crossexaminationthat he had not given any car, air conditioner, refrigerator, television and scooter in the marriage to his daughter. 6. He has also stated that Superintendent of police (Detective) had given a report exonerating the appellant from the allegation of having made a demand of dowry, but has stated that differences existed between the appellant and the deceased on account of temperamental behavior. However, PW2 had, in his examination-in-chief, deposed that in the dowry, the parents of the deceased had given jewellery weighing about 25 tolas, rs.1,10,000/- and other customary articles. But, in his cross-examination, he deposed that he had not stated during the inquest proceedings that 25 tollas of jewllery was given into the dowry or that Rs.1, 10,000/-along with other articles were given. 7. He further deposed that he had only stated that restrictions were imposed on kamalpreet Kaur regarding her movements. When these two statements are to be evaluated, then the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the allegations of demand of dowry and consequent cruelty are not established. It also relevant to mention here that the Supreme Court, in arecent judgment reported as Bhaskar Lal Sharma and Anr. Vs. When these two statements are to be evaluated, then the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the allegations of demand of dowry and consequent cruelty are not established. It also relevant to mention here that the Supreme Court, in arecent judgment reported as Bhaskar Lal Sharma and Anr. Vs. Monica,2009 (4) Recent Apex Judgments 609 (S. C.), has observed that the gifts given to the bridegroom or his parents, whether in accordance with any custom or otherwise, would not constitute an offence punishable under Sec.406 of the I. P. C. Indeed, in cases, such as this, it is essentially the complainant and his relatives, who are to come out with the version of the demands of dowry, but if, at the time of marriage itself, no articles were given, which has been conceded by the complainant himself in the instant case, and almost reiterated by PW2-Harbaljit Singh, then in such an eventuality, the Court cannot conclude on the facts of the case that subsequent demands of dowry would have been made, especially when there is no material to suggest such demands or anything to show that protests were made by the complainant or his relations either before some other relations or before some authorities regarding such demands. 8. It is, thus, a case where there is no evidence to substantiate and establish the ingreidients of Sec.304-B of the I. P. C. , which is reproduced below:- "304-B. Dowry death.- (1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any bums 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 purposes of this sub-section, "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 but which may extend to imprisonment for life. " 9. Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section, "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 but which may extend to imprisonment for life. " 9. An analysis of the above extracted provisions of law reveals that to satisfy the ingredients of Sec.304-B of the I. P. C, it has to be established that soon before her death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relation of her husband, for or in connection with any demand of dowry. There is also no doubt that if any unnatural death takes place within seven years from the date of marriage, then it invites the presumption under Sec.113-B of the Evidence Act, but, at the same time, the presumption of law cannot per se result in the conviction of an accused person unless there is cogent evidence led by the prosecution which points out to his complicity or his relation in the commission of such offence. There has to be positive evidence on record to show that such demands were made upon the deceased by the accused person or some of his family members before such an inference can be safely translated into a conclusion. 10. Reverting back to the evidence on record, the testimony of PW1 and PW2, who are father and Maasad of the deceased, does not bring out any such material with regard to the demand of dowry or harassment on that account. PW1 even did not give a list of dowry articles to the Investigating Officer, who has testified in as many terms while recording his statement. In my opinion, there is nothing on record from where it can be inferred that the ingredients of Sec.304-B of the I. P. C. 11. Stand established against the appellant so as to sustain his conviction and sentence under the aforesaid provisions of law. In the result, this appeal is accepted, the impugned judgment is reversed, the conviction and sentence of the appellant are set aside and he is acquitted of the charge against him.