Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 45 (HP)

State Of Himachal Pradesh v. Satpal

2017-01-11

SANJAY KAROL, VIVEK SINGH THAKUR

body2017
JUDGMENT Vivek Singh Thakur, J. —State has filed the instant appeal against the acquittal of respondents vide judgment dated 25.10.2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge Chamba in Sessions trial No. 31 of 2013 (1916/2013) in case FIR No. 69 of 2013, registered under Sections 306, 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sadar, Chamba. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and also have gone through the records of the case. 3. Crime Investigation Agency was put in motion on the basis of statement made by complainant PW-3 Bhinder Kumar under Section 154 Cr.P.C. on 27.3.2013, stating therein that on 26.3.2013 at 9:00 P.M., on reaching home, he came to know that his niece Boby Kumari deceased has left her matrimonial home and villagers were searching Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes her and in the morning of 27.3.2013 he also reached Chamba in search of deceased Boby Kumari and noticed dead body of deceased Boby Kumari upper side of Ballu bridge in river Ravi. As immediately thereafter, because of heavy flow of water, dead body was not visible, he requested administration to decrease flow of water and at about 3:30 P.M. dead body was brought out. He alleged in this complaint that deceased had committed suicide by jumping from Sheetla Bridge at about 7/7:30 P.M. on 26.3.2013 because of maltreatment and harassment of her in-laws. In pursuance to statement of PW-3, FIR Ex. PW-7/A was registered under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 IPC against the respondents. After conclusion of trial, respondents have been acquitted, hence present appeal. 4. Prosecution has examined seven witnesses to prove its case against respondents. Learned Additional Advocate General has relied upon statements of PW-3 Bhinder Kumar Uncle, PW-4 Hem Raj, brother and PW-5 Smt. Thakri Devi, mother of the deceased. 5. On scrutiny of statements of witnesses, we find that allegations of maltreatment and cruelty are unspecific and bald in nature. No particular instance of maltreatment has been quoted by either of the witnesses relied upon by the prosecution. PW-3 Bhinder Kumar stated that deceased was apprehending danger to her life from her in-laws, but he has not stated even a single word about the reasons for such apprehension. No particular instance of maltreatment has been quoted by either of the witnesses relied upon by the prosecution. PW-3 Bhinder Kumar stated that deceased was apprehending danger to her life from her in-laws, but he has not stated even a single word about the reasons for such apprehension. In his statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C. he stated that because of harassment by in-laws, deceased had committed suicide at about 7/7:30 P.M. by jumping in river Ravi from Sheetla Bridge, but in his deposition in Court, he is silent about maltreatment as well as timing, place and manner of committing suicide by deceased. It is also a mystery that how and from whom PW-3 Bhinder Kumar came to know that deceased had committed suicide by jumping from Sheetla Bridge at about 7/7:30 P.M., as the dead body of deceased was found near Balu Bridge and not near Sheetla Bridge. Further he did not utter even a single word about maltreatment in his deposition in the Court rather he admitted in cross-examination that type of maltreatment being given to deceased was not disclosed to him by deceased. In his statement he nowhere stated that deceased had ever shown her intention of committing suicide on account of maltreatment by her in-laws, rather he has stated that 4-5 months earlier to her death, deceased disclosed to him apprehension of danger to her life from her in-laws. But case of prosecution is not of committing murder, but that of committing suicide by deceased, reasons of which are not clear. 6. PW-4 Hem Raj, brother of deceased deposed that respondents used to point out defects in every work performed by his sister. He further stated that after committing suicide by his sister, he understood that deceased had committed suicide because of demand of dowry by respondents. In FIR or in deposition of PW-3 Bhinder Kumar and PW-5 Smt. Thakri Devi, mother of deceased, there is no allegation of demand of dowry. Therefore, allegations levelled by PW-4 Hem Raj are also not believable. 7. PW-5 Smt. Thakri Devi has alleged that respondents used to demand dowry and used to maltreat her for such demand. Whereas, PW-4 Hem Raj has stated that respondents were maltreating her sister on account of defects in her work. This is the entire evidence led by prosecution regarding maltreatment and reasons of committing suicide by deceased. 8. 7. PW-5 Smt. Thakri Devi has alleged that respondents used to demand dowry and used to maltreat her for such demand. Whereas, PW-4 Hem Raj has stated that respondents were maltreating her sister on account of defects in her work. This is the entire evidence led by prosecution regarding maltreatment and reasons of committing suicide by deceased. 8. Statements of PWs do not disclose any specific particulars of any incident of maltreatment and prosecution evidence suffers infirmity with respect to time, place and nature of maltreatment to deceased by respondents. 9. PW-7 ASI Rajinder Kumar is the Investigating Officer, who admitted in his cross-examination that during investigation, it had not come in evidence of any witness that respondents used to torture deceased on account of demand of dowry. He admitted that when deceased had left the house only her 85 years old grandmother-in-law was in house. 10. From the perusal of evidence led by prosecution, we find nothing on record to establish that deceased was being maltreated by respondents or soon before committing suicide, deceased was maltreated, harassed or subjected to cruelty, so as to drive her to commit suicide on account of such maltreatment, harassment or cruelty etc. From evidence led by prosecution, it can be inferred that immediately after missing of deceased Boby Kumari from her in-laws, her relatives from parental side were informed and it is only respondents who informed the mother and other relatives of deceased with regard to missing of deceased and it is admitted fact that not only PW-3, PW-4 and PW-5, but also other relatives and villagers of deceased were having knowledge of her missing on 26.3.2012 itself. Therefore, even conduct of respondents does not reflect any mischief on their part. 11. There is no cogent, reliable, trustworthy, believable and convincing evidence on record, so as to hold that respondents have committed offence under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 IPC. Learned trial Court has correctly and completely appreciated the evidence on record and has rightly acquitted the respondents. Respondents have been acquitted by the trial Court which further substantiates presumption of their innocence and prosecution has failed to lead cogent, reliable, convincing evidence so as to rebut presumption of innocence in favour of accused/respondents. 12. No case for interference is made out in the present appeal, therefore, the same being devoid of any merits, is dismissed. Respondents have been acquitted by the trial Court which further substantiates presumption of their innocence and prosecution has failed to lead cogent, reliable, convincing evidence so as to rebut presumption of innocence in favour of accused/respondents. 12. No case for interference is made out in the present appeal, therefore, the same being devoid of any merits, is dismissed. Personal bail and surety bonds of respondents are discharged. Record be sent back to the trial Court.