CHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, who was husband of the deceased, has filed the present appeal challenging his conviction and sentence under Sec. 304B, 498A and 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC). The Trial Court had sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Sec. 304B, 2 years under Sec. 498A and 2 years under Sec. 201 IPC. However, the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital had reduced the sentence of the appellant under Sec. 304B IPC from ten years to seven years.

(2.) The appellant and deceased Chhilo Kaur got married in the year 1993. The deceased was residing in her matrimonial home. On 24/6/1995 at 6.15 p.m. father of the deceased, Pratap Singh (PW-1) filed complaint with the P.S. Jaspur stating that his daughter Chhilo Kaur was married to the appellant about two years ago. In the marriage, he had given sufficient dowry as per his status. Two months after the marriage, his daughter came to her parental home and told the complainant (PW-1) that her in-laws are asking her to bring a motorcycle as the same was not given in dowry. The complainant pacified his daughter stating that at present he is not capable of giving motorcycle, however, whenever he is in a position to do so, he will certainly give and sent his daughter back to her matrimonial home. Thereafter, whenever his daughter came to the parental home, she used to talk about the demand of motorcycle and subsequently after about one year of marriage, the demand for land was also made. Every time he used to pacify his daughter and sent her back. On the previous day i.e. on 23/6/1995, one Jagir Singh of village Bhogpur Dam, where his daughter lived after marriage with the appellant came to complainant and told him that his daughter, Chhilo Kaur has been murdered by her in-laws. On getting the information, the complainant along with his wife came to village Bhogpur Dam on 24/6/1995 and were shocked to know that on 22/6/1995 in the morning at about 8.00 a.m., his daughter was beaten up and strangulated to death by her husband Charan Singh, (the appellant herein), brother-in-law, Gurmeet Singh (accused no.2) and mother-in-law Santo Kaur (accused no.3). They had cremated the dead body without even informing the complainant. She was killed on account of non-fulfilment of demand of motorbike and land in dowry. The matter was investigated and chargesheet was filed against Charan Singh, Gurmeet Singh and Santo Kaur.

(3.) The prosecution examined six witnesses and defence examined one witness. The Trial Court, after evaluating the evidence, convicted Charan Singh (appellant), Gurmeet Singh and Santo Kaur under Ss. 304B, 498A and 201 IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years u/s 304B IPC, rigorous imprisonment for two years u/s 498A IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years u/s 201 IPC. In appeal filed by the convicts before the High Court, the conviction and sentence of Gurmeet Singh (brother-in-law) and Santo Kaur (mother-in-law) under Sec. 304B, 498A and 201 IPC were set aside and they were acquitted of the charges, whereas the conviction of the appellant was upheld. However, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of ten years under Sec. 304B IPC, awarded to the appellant was reduced to seven years. It is the aforesaid judgment of the High Court which is under challenge in the present appeal.