Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1884 (RAJ)

State Of Raj v. Banshi Lal S/o Mangaram

2025-11-28

MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, SANGEETA SHARMA

body2025
Judgment/Order : Sangeeta Sharma, J. 1. The instant D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 177/2004, State of Rajasthan vs Banshi Lal under Section 378 (I)(III) Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant-State, assailing the judgment dated 24.04.2003 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Laxmangarh, District Alwar in Sessions Case No.107/2002, whereby, respondent-accused was acquitted for the offences under Sections 304 -B and 498-A of IPC . 2. During the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that evidence of PW.2 Dharmo Bai and PW.3 Ashok Kumar i.e. mother and brother respectively of the deceased produced by the prosecution was credit worthy but the learned Trial Court had erred in appreciating the evidence in right perspective and wrongfully acquitted the respondent-accused Banshi Lal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State has also submitted that it is a case in which a young woman died due to dowry demands, the marriage was one year old and death was unnatural. 4. The brief facts of the case are that deceased Smt. Laxmi the sister of the complainant PW.3 was married to respondent-accused in the year 1993 and on the fateful day of 19.02.1994, she consumed poison. Indisputedly, on seeing foam coming out of the mouth of Laxmi, respondent-accused the husband of the deceased, immediately rushed his wife Smt. Laxmi to the hospital for treatment, where he made all the arrangements required for her treatment and the duty doctor did his best but despite all efforts she could not be saved. It is also not in dispute that respondent-accused informed the members of his in laws family in time and PW.2 Dharmo Bai-mother and PW.3 Ashok Kumar- brother of the deceased reached to the hospital. Simultaneously the duty doctor PW.1 Dr. S.K. Garg also informed the police and inquest proceedings(Ex.6) were carried out in the presence of PW.2 and PW.3 respectively-mother and brother of the deceased but at that point of time they raised no objection/suspicion regarding the death of the deceased- Smt. Laxmi and she was cremated in their presence. 5. On the basis of above facts, FIR was lodged on 20.02.1994 and investigation commenced accordingly. After investigation, police filed a charge-sheet against the respondent-accused under Section 304 -B and 498-A of IPC . 5. On the basis of above facts, FIR was lodged on 20.02.1994 and investigation commenced accordingly. After investigation, police filed a charge-sheet against the respondent-accused under Section 304 -B and 498-A of IPC . During the course of trial, evidence of 8 prosecution witnesses was recorded and 11 documents were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution, thereafter, the accused-respondent was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he denied the suggestions put to him and examined DW.1 Amir Chand in support of his defence. 6. After hearing both the parties as well as considering the evidence and material available on record, the learned Trial Court acquitted the respondent-accused of the charges by a detailed judgment dated 24.04.2003 which is the subject matter of the present appeal. 7. The witness PW.1 Dr. S.K. Garg has categorically stated that on 19.02.1994 at 2.00 pm, Smt. Laxmi Bai was brought to the hospital in a critical condition by her husband and family members. He reiterated the fact that he tried his level best to save the life of Smt. Laxmi but despite all efforts she could not be saved and died at 3.40 pm. On that very day at 4.30 pm post mortem was conducted by a medical Board in which he was one of the member and post mortem report Ex. P.3 was prepared. 8. During the course of examination, PW.1 Dr. S.K. Garg stated that he informed the concerned SHO, Police Station, Govindgarh vide letters i.e. Ex. P.1 and Ex.P.3 that it is a suspected case of consuming poison and despite all efforts Smt. Laxmi could not be saved and died at 3.40 pm on 19.02.2024. Thereupon, proceeding under Section 174 Cr.P.C. was initiated and post mortem was conducted on the very day at 4.30 pm and during the course of conducting post mortem of the body of Smt. Laxmi, a dead fetus of 6-7 months was found in her womb. He categorically stated in his cross-examination that there were no injury marks on the body of the deceased. 9. Though PW.2 and PW.3(mother and brother of the deceased) had supported the case, presented by the prosecution pertaining to demand of dowry, cruelty and harassment being caused to the deceased by her husband and his family members in their examination-in-chief but failed to produce any cogent and credible evidence in this regard. 10. 9. Though PW.2 and PW.3(mother and brother of the deceased) had supported the case, presented by the prosecution pertaining to demand of dowry, cruelty and harassment being caused to the deceased by her husband and his family members in their examination-in-chief but failed to produce any cogent and credible evidence in this regard. 10. PW.2 Dharmo Bai in her deposition stated that a day before the incident, her daughter deceased Smt. Laxmi came to her home and she gave her Rs.10,000 in presence of Prahlad and Kallo but Prahlad and Kallo were not examined to support this averment. Further, she admitted in her deposition that person named Jagdish came to their place on 19.02.1994 at 3.00 pm to inform them about the incident, thereafter, she herself and her son Ashok rushed to the hospital. She has also admitted that on that fateful day respondent-accused Banshi Lal and Laxmi were repairing their house with bricks and mud. 11. PW.3 Ashok Kumar brother of the deceased has admitted in his cross-examination that there are improvements in his statements made during examination-in-chief and the facts as narrated in the examination-in-chief are not there in complaint Ex.P.4 and likewise in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. i.e. Ex.D.2. During his cross-examination PW.3 Ashok Kumar admits that his sister had an illicit relationship with Munshi Lal and this was the matter of discord between the deceased and her husband. Further he admits that up to 19.02.1994 neither he made any query from any person residing near the matrimonial home of his sister nor any of them ever pointed out to him about the demand of dowry or illtreatment with his sister and he never saw any injury marks on the body of his sister. 12. Rest of the witnesses are PW.4 Dilip Singh who has been declared hostile. PW.5 is Sanu Ram who has reiterated the fact that deceased Smt. Laxmi had an illicit relations with Mushi Lal likewise PW.6 Ramesh Chand categorically stated in his cross- examination that Banshi Lal used to keep his wife Smt. Laxmi in all comforts. PW.8 Ramji Lal is also declared hostile. PW.9 Babu Lal is the constable who has deposited the sample in FSL for chemical examination on 01.03.1994 and PW.7 is the Investigating Officer. 13. PW.8 Ramji Lal is also declared hostile. PW.9 Babu Lal is the constable who has deposited the sample in FSL for chemical examination on 01.03.1994 and PW.7 is the Investigating Officer. 13. So looking to the evidence led by the prosecution, no case for any harassment or demand of dowry to the deceased(Laxmi) has been made out and it is an admitted legal position that the presumption of dowry death, thus could get activated only upon proof of the fact that the deceased lady has been subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand of dowry by the accused soon before her death or otherwise( Section 304 -B, 498-A of IPC and Section 113 -B of the Indian Evidence Act). And it is an admitted position that the deceased was not subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand for dowry by the accused. 14. With reference to the legal position as referred above, the matter is now required to be examined as to whether the case in hand falls in the category, where the presumption can be raised against the respondent and putting the onus on the accused-respondent. 15. As referred hereinabove, it is indisputed that on 19.02.1994 respondent-accused Banshi Lal and his wife Smt. Laxmi were repairing their house, which was made of mud. Suddenly, Smt. Laxmi went into the house and consumed something poisonous and came out of the house with foam coming out of her mouth. Seeing this the respondent-accused Banshi Lal rushed his wife to the hospital and informed the members of his in laws family whereupon her brother and mother reached to the hospital and thereafter, inquest proceedings were carried out and the post mortem was conducted in their presence but at that point of time, they have raised no objection/suspicion regarding death of Smt. Laxmi. It is also pertinent to mention that the brother of the deceased, PW.3 Ashok Kumar had categorically admitted in his statements that his sister Smt. Laxmi had an illicit relations with Munshi Lal and this was the bone of contention between the deceased Smt. Laxmi and her husband. 16. This Court finds that the evidence has been dealt with by the learned Trial Court at length and that such evidence is disbelieved for the offences under Sections 304 -B and 498-A IPC . 16. This Court finds that the evidence has been dealt with by the learned Trial Court at length and that such evidence is disbelieved for the offences under Sections 304 -B and 498-A IPC . So, after going through the evidence led by the prosecution. We are of the view that findings recorded by the learned trial Court in acquitting the respondent- accused for the offences under -B and 498-A of do not suffer any infirmity or perversity and keeping in view the settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in catena of judgments to the fact that “the appellate Court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible and there is an illegality, perversity or error of law or fact in the decision of the trial Court”. This principle is also reiterated in a recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Brijesh Singh vs State of U.P. & Ors., 2025 SC 1086. 17. In the present case, the learned Trial Court before passing the impugned judgment has examined each and every witnesses at considerable length and duly analysed the oral as well as documentary evidence, thus, the impugned judgment suffers from no perversity or error of law or fact, so as to warrant any interference by this Court in this appeal. 18. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid observations and looking to the facts and matrix of the present case as well as in the light of aforementioned precedent law, this Court does not find it a fit case wherein any interference is required. 19. Consequently, the instant Appeal No.177/2004 is dismissed. 20. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. 21. Record of the trial court be sent back forthwith.