STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. IQBAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mohinder Kaur set herself and her three children ablaze on the afternoon of 7th June, 1983, at the residence of her husband lqbal Singh. The marriage had taken place seven or eight years before the incident. She had given birth to two daughters and a son. The deceased was working as a teacher while her husband was a clerk in the Punjab State Electricity Board office at Amritsar. Soon after the marriage there were disputes between them on the question of dowry. The demand for extra dowry strained the relations between them and the husband began to ill-treat the deceased wife. It appears that in course of time there was further deterioration in their relationship as a result where of the deceased had written a letter to the Deputy Superintendent of Police on 12th October, 1977 complaining about the illtreatment meted out to her and apprehending danger to her life and the life of her children. She had, therefore, sought police protection. However, by the time the police came to inquire into the matter there was some understanding as a result of which she had informed the police that no further action be taken for the present but her application may be kept pending. Then on 3]st December, 1977 a divorce deed Exh. D-2 was executed but was not acted upon. It seems that the situation did not improve and as a result she took the extreme step of putting an end to her life as well as the lives of her three children since she apprehended that their fate would be worse after her death. However, before putting an end to her life she wrote a letter that very morning which has been reproduced in extenso in paragraph 13 of thejudgment of the trial Court. The text of that letter dated 7th June, 1983 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Public Dealing Branch, Amritsar, shows that her husband was demanding Rs. 35,000 to Rs. 40,000 by way of additional dowry and was ill-treating her under the influence of alcohol on that account. She also alleged that her mother-inlaw and sister-in-law also conspired and made false accusations against her and instigated her if she refused to bring the additional dowry. She alleges that they had conspired to kill her on the night of 6th June, 1983 by sprinkling kerosene petrol on her but their plan misfired. She was fed up on account of the beating given to her that night. She further alleged that her children were also ill-treated by her husband and his family members. On account of these developments she states that she had taken the decision to put an end (to) her life and tlives of her children to spare them of the present and future agony. At the foot of the letter she appended a note to the effect that even after their death she apprehended that her husband and his family members may try, to cause physical harm to her mother and Younger brother and requested the police to extend to them the necessary protection. She implores that her salary, G.P. Fund and other monetary benefits to which she may be entitled from the school authorities should not fall in the hands of her husband and his relatives and may be given to some school or orphanage and her ornaments, etc. may be recovered from her in-laws and be returned to her parents. Another letter of even date was addressed to her mother (her father having since died) stating that she was fed up of the continuous tension, suffering and agony that her mother had to go through on her account as she could not meet the demand for extra dowry. She also states that apart from her husband demanding extra dowry he has started making false accusations against her and beating her time and again on that account. She further alleges that her busband's mother and sister were privy to this beating by her husband but she had somehow survived. Then she adds today 1 along with three children am sacrificing by fire. She ends the letter by stating that her mother need not think that her daughter was dead, in fact she will gain freedom from seven years of hell. In the letter addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Police there is a reference to the earlier application,' letter dated 12th October, 1977 by which she had complained about possible risk to life. It appears from the said letter that the police had gone to inquire into the matter two months later on 11th Decemher, 1977 but during that intervening period the relatives of her husband had intervened and had temporarily patched up the matter. It was for that reason that she informed the police that no action was immediately necessarv but still she insisted that her application may be kept pending. Thus this subsequent letter contains intrinsic evidence about her previous application dated 12th October, 1977.

(2.) After the unfortunate incident which took place on the afternoon of 7th June, 1983, a First Information Report was lodged against the husband lqbal Singh, by the mother of the deceased. After investigation the husband, his mother and sister were put up for trial. The trial Court on an examination of the prosecution evidence convicted all the three accused persons under S. 306, I.P.C. and sentenced the husband lqbal Singh to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. 5,000, in default, rigorous imprisonment for one year. So far as the other two accused were concerned, having regard to their role and the fact that the mother was an aged and frail woman, he sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs. 1,000 each, in default, rigorous imprisonment for three months.

(3.) Against this order of conviction and sentence all the three accused persons preferred an appeal before the High Court. The High Court on a reappreciation of the evidence and having regard to the language of S. 306, I.P.C. came to the conclusion that the prosecution evidence did not establish the ingredients of the section, in that, there was no evidence to show that any of the accused was guilty of abetment. In this view that the High Court took, it allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellants. The State has, therefore, approached this Court by way of special leave. In the meantime the accused Manjit Kaur has passed away. The appeal is, therefore, limited to lqbal Singh and his sister Kulwant Kaur.