Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 185 (UTT)

State of Uttarakhand v. Pankaj Pant

2024-03-13

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, RITU BAHRI

body2024
JUDGMENT : Ritu Bahri, C.J. CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 382 OF 2013 Appellant in CRLA No. 382/2013 has come up in appeal against the judgment passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh in Session Trial No. 08/2012 dated 02/03.09.2013, whereby the appellant- Pankaj Pant has been convicted for three years for offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. 2. The marriage of the appellant was solemnized with the deceased-Bhawna on 14.12.2006. As per the complainant (brother of deceased), on 20.02.2012 at about 09:45 P.M., he had rung up his sister on phone, who told her that her family members and in-laws are beating her. At 10:45 P.M. at night, the appellant-Pankaj Pant called the complainant on phone, and told him that Bhawna has burnt herself and committed suicide. He also told the mother of the complainant that he had given two injuries to Bhawna Pant with Danda. 3. As per the complainant, his sister has been killed by the appellant-Pankaj Pant and his family members on account of demand of dowry. Based on this complaint, an FIR, being FIR No. 15/2012 was registered under Sections 304B & 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 4. After investigation, Challan was presented and Pankaj Pant, Girish Chandra Pant and Smt. Chandra Pant were charge-sheeted under Sections 304B and 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and the fourth accused Brijesh Pant was charge-sheeted under Section 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 5. Before the Trial Court, after framing of the charges, evidence was led by the prosecution, and following witnesses were examined : P.W.-1 Harish Chandra Joshi, brother of deceased Bhawna Pant. P.W.-2 Smt. Kamla Joshi, mother of deceased Bhawna Pant P.W.-3 Smt. Rekha Pant, Sister of the deceased. P.W.-4 Dr. D.S. Panchpal, who conducted postmortem on the deceased P.W.-5 Naresh Durgapal, Officer who prepared inquest P.W.-6 Sub-Inspector Prakash Singh P.W.-7 Sub-Inspector Prakash Chandra Punetha P.W.-8 Sub-Inspector Vijaya P.W.-9 Amit Srivastava, Superintendent of Police, Investigating Officer 6. The Trial Court, after going through the entire evidence led by the prosecution, acquitted all the accused under Sections 304B & 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. However, the husband of the deceased-Pankaj Pant has been convicted under Section 498A IPC for three years. 7. The Trial Court, after going through the entire evidence led by the prosecution, acquitted all the accused under Sections 304B & 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. However, the husband of the deceased-Pankaj Pant has been convicted under Section 498A IPC for three years. 7. Counsel for the appellant has argued that the offence under Section 498A per se is not made out against the appellant, keeping in view the fact that all other accused have been acquitted under Sections 304B and 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and no evidence can be led against the present appellant to make out a case under Section 498A IPC. 8. After going through the impugned judgment, and as per the facts taken note of therein, on 20.02.2012, the three year old daughter of the appellant went missing, and when her wife Bhawna got her daughter back after two hours, there was a fight between the appellant-husband and the deceased-wife, and during the fight, the appellant inflicted two injuries on the wife Bhawna with Danda, and this fact was disclosed by the appellant to the mother of the deceased-Bhawna, when the brother of the deceased called the deceased on phone at 09:45 P.M., and, thereafter, the deceased-Bhawna committed suicide. 9. In the facts of the present case, relevant provisions of Section 498A IPC can be examined, i.e. sub-clauses (a) and (b). Section 498A IPC reads as under: “498-A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, “cruelty” means— (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.” 10. As per sub-clause (a) of Section 498A IPC, to make out an offence under Section 498A IPC, there has to be any wilful conduct which is of such a nature, as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide, or to cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb or health (whether mental or physical). 11. In the present case, on 20.02.2012, when the appellant had inflicted two injuries on the deceased Bhawna with Danda, she went in the room and burnt herself. Giving two injuries with the Danda was of such a nature, that her reaction was very strong, as she had got her daughter back after two hours when she went missing, and these injuries can be held to be of such a nature, which drove her to commit suicide, and as per Section 498A IPC even if she has caused a grave injury on herself, it would amount to offence under Section 498A IPC. 12. Since in the present case, the offence under Section 498A IPC is made out against the appellant- Pankaj Pant, this Criminal Appeal preferred by him is being dismissed. However, on the quantum of sentence, keeping in view that the appellant has one daughter, who is residing in the house of the appellant, and he has to give time to her daughter for her proper upbringing, the conviction of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him, which is about 1½ years. GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. 108 OF 2013 : 13. As far as the Appeal filed by the State, against the acquittal of the other accused is concerned, in the present case, no evidence has been led by the prosecution to show that there was any demand of dowry, and the only evidence against Pankaj Pant was that he has given beating to his wife with Danda on 20.02.2012. 14. Hence, no case is made out for interference in the judgment of acquittal. The present Government Appeal is also dismissed. 15. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.