Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 368 (HP)

State of H. P. v. Gian Chand

2015-04-18

RAJIV SHARMA, SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2015
Judgment : Rajiv Sharma, J. This appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 13.5.2008, rendered by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Mandi, H.P. in Sessions Trial No. 31 of 2004, whereby the respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who was charged with and tried for offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC, has been acquitted. 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that Preeti Devi, daughter of the complainant Sh. Duni Chand (PW-1) was married with the accused on 7.3.1995. The accused was employed in Health Department of the Himachal Pradesh. On 22.8.2003, Preeti Devi went to cut grass but she did not return home. On 25.8.2003, Duni Chand PW-1 submitted a complaint to the Incharge, Police Post Dharampur, wherein he submitted that his daughter Smt. Preeti Devi, wife of the accused was missing since 22.8.2003. It was also stated in the complaint that Gian Chand, his parents and nephew used to harass and torture Preeti Devi. They also used to beat her. On the basis of the written complaint, FIR was registered and the case was investigated. On completion of the investigation, challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as 12 witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. He has denied the prosecution case. The learned trial Court acquitted the accused, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, this appeal at the instance of the State. 4. Mr. M.A. Khan, learned Addl. Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused. On the other hand, Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate, for the accused has supported the judgment of the learned trial Court dated 13.5.2008. 5. We have heard learned counsel for both the sides and gone through the records of the case minutely. 6. Sh. Duni Chand, PW-1 is the father of the deceased Preeti Devi. According to him, the accused has told that he did not want any dowry. He was employed in the Health Department. The accused started giving beatings to Preeti Devi within one month from her marriage. His second daughter Sunita told him about the beatings given to Preeti Devi. He went to the house of the accused. He saw injuries on left arm and left leg of Preeti Devi. He was employed in the Health Department. The accused started giving beatings to Preeti Devi within one month from her marriage. His second daughter Sunita told him about the beatings given to Preeti Devi. He went to the house of the accused. He saw injuries on left arm and left leg of Preeti Devi. She told him that she was beaten up by “Lathi” by the accused. Somebody informed him that Preeti Devi was missing on 22.8.2003. He identified the body of Preeti Devi. He suspected the accused to have killed Preeti Devi since he used to beat her. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he told about the beatings given to the Preeti to the mother of the accused. However, he did not disclose this fact to any other person. He did not report the matter about beatings given to Preeti to any Authority under the belief that the behavior of the accused may improve in future. He did not disclose this matter to any authority till her death. 7. Ms. Madhu, PW-2 is the sister of deceased Preeti Devi. According to her on 20.8.2003, Preeti visited her house. She told her that her husband was drug addict. She also told her that accused used to beat her with danda for bringing insufficient dowry. The accused was also with Preeti on that day at her house and next morning, accused and Preeti went away at 6:00 AM. She asked Preeti and accused to stay at her house on that day. She did not disclose this fact to any other person under the belief that accused would improve his behavior. In her cross-examination, she admitted that the accused refused to receive any dowry. She made the statement to the police that Preeti told her that she was being beaten up for not bringing dowry by the accused person. (Whereas it is not so recorded in mark ‘C’). 8. Smt. Jaswanti, PW-3 is the step mother of the deceased. She also stated that the accused had refused to accept dowry at the time of marriage with Preeti Devi. Whenever Preeti visited their house, she used to tell her that she was being harassed and beaten up by the accused person for bringing more dowry and she used to tell her that she was being tortured and humiliated. 9. Dr. Navnit Chauhan, has conducted the post mortem examination on 28.8.2003. Whenever Preeti visited their house, she used to tell her that she was being harassed and beaten up by the accused person for bringing more dowry and she used to tell her that she was being tortured and humiliated. 9. Dr. Navnit Chauhan, has conducted the post mortem examination on 28.8.2003. The post mortem report is Ext. PW-4/C. According to her opinion, the cause of death was due to drowning. 10. Sh. Jai Singh, PW-6 deposed that on 22.8.2003, at about 5:30 PM, he was sitting in the temple of Rira, when Preeti Devi came with a sickle and plastic envelope in her hand. She was going to cut grass. She told him that he should also go to cut grass and he told her that she may go to cut and bring grass. Sickle is Ext. P-1 and plastic bag is Ext. P-2. At about 7/7:30 PM, on the same day, he met Amku Devi in his house, the mother of the accused. She told him that Preeti Devi did not return home who had gone to cut grass. He told Amku Devi that he had seen Preeti Devi going towards Beas river at about 5:30 PM. Thereafter, he alongwith other villagers went in search of Preeti Devi on the bank of river Beas. he also admitted in his cross-examination that so long Preeti Devi lived with the accused, they never heard about her beatings, harassment and torture by the accused nor Preeti told them about beating, harassment and torture. She was living happily and peacefully with the accused. 11. Sh. Om Prakash, PW-7 deposed that they came to know that Preeti had gone to cut grass and she did not return back to her home. He alongwith the villagers went to search Preeti Devi in the jungle and on river side also. He also admitted in his cross-examination that Preeti Devi never made any complaint to any villager about beatings, harassment or torture by the accused person. Preeti Devi and Gian Chand were living happily and peacefully and Gian Chand had also constructed new house in the village. 12. Smt. Sunita Devi, PW-10 is also the sister of deceased Preeti Devi. She also stated that Gian Chand told before marriage that he did not require any dowry. 13. Preeti Devi and Gian Chand were living happily and peacefully and Gian Chand had also constructed new house in the village. 12. Smt. Sunita Devi, PW-10 is also the sister of deceased Preeti Devi. She also stated that Gian Chand told before marriage that he did not require any dowry. 13. ASI Arjun Dass, PW-11 testified that he went to the spot on the bank of river Beas where Dupatta, pair of Chappal and pair of ear ring was kept on the bank of river. Duni Chand father of deceased Preeti alongwith several villagers was not on the spot. Gian Chand was there who identified Dupatta etc. to be of his wife Preeti Devi. He recorded the statement of Duni Chand on 25.8.2003 vide Ext. PW-1/A. The dead body of Preeti Devi was found in Beas river at lower Beri village. He also prepared the spot map. In his cross-examination, he stated that the statement of Duni Chand was recorded by him on 23.8.2003 but it was not shown to him in the Court. He had placed the statement with the case file. He did not remember what statement was made by Duni Chand. According to him, no case was made out on the basis of that statement of Duni Chand. 14. SI Anil Verma, PW-12 stated that on the basis of the application Ext. PW-1/A on 25.8.2003, FIR Ext. PW-9/A was registered. 15. What emerges from the appraisal of the statements of the witnesses discussed here-in-above, is that the marriage of accused was solemnized with Preeti Devi on 7.3.1995. Sh. Duni Chand, PW-1 has admitted categorically that the accused has not accepted any dowry. He has also admitted that he has told about the beatings given to Preeti Devi to the mother of the accused. He has not disclosed this fact to any other person. Ms. Madhu, PW-2 has also admitted that the accused had refused to receive any dowry. According to her, she has made statement to the police that Preeti had told her that she was being beaten up for not bringing sufficient dowry. However, she was confronted with her earlier statement wherein it is not so recorded. Smt. Jaswanti Devi, PW-3 step mother of the deceased Preeti Devi, deposed that the accused had refused to accept dowry at the time of his marriage with Preeti. Sh. However, she was confronted with her earlier statement wherein it is not so recorded. Smt. Jaswanti Devi, PW-3 step mother of the deceased Preeti Devi, deposed that the accused had refused to accept dowry at the time of his marriage with Preeti. Sh. Jai Singh, PW-6 and Om Prakash PW-7 have categorically stated in their cross-examination that the accused was living happily and peacefully with Preeti Devi. She has never complained to them about the beatings, harassment or torture by the accused. Smt. Sunita Devi, PW-10 is also sister of the deceased. She also admitted that Gian Chand accused told before marriage that he did not require any dowry. 16. It has come on record that the statement of Sh. Duni Chand, PW-1 was recorded on 23.8.2003 but it has not been placed on record. ASI Arjun Dass, PW-11 has admitted in his cross-examination that on the basis of the complaint dated 23.8.2003, no case was made out against the accused. The prosecution has miserably failed to prove that the accused has abetted the deceased to suicide. The prosecution has also failed to prove that the acts of the accused have caused mental or physical cruelty to the deceased. 17. The view of the learned trial Court that the deceased might have slipped into the river Beas accidentally cannot be termed as perverse. Sh. Jai Singh, PW-6 in his examination-in-chief has stated that the deceased has asked him also to go with her to cut the grass. However, if she had to commit suicide, she would have gone quietly to river Beas instead of asking Jai Singh PW-6 to accompany her to cut grass. Thus, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case against the accused. 18. Accordingly, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed. There is no occasion for this Court to interfere with the well reasoned judgment of the learned trial Court dated 13.5.2008.