SURESH KUMARI AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There were originally three Appellants in these two appeals. First and second Appellants are the sons of the third Appellant who is no more. The first Appellant is the brother of the second Appellant. The second Appellant is the husband of the deceased. The third Appellant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. Inasmuch as the third Appellant is no more who is stated to have expired on 6th October 2014 and a death certificate dated 11th October, 2014 has been filed in proof of her death, the appeal insofar as the third Appellant stands abated. We are, therefore, confining ourselves to the appeals relating to the Appellants 1 and 2.

(2.) The deceased one, Seema, got married to the second Appellant on 11th September, 1991, prior to her death which occurred on 14th May, 1990 at 5:25 a.m. Earlier, there was a complaint at her instance on 20th November, 1995 to the Superintendent of Police for dowry harassment as against the original Appellants. It is stated that there was a compromise between the parties and according to P.W. 3, A.S.I., a status report dated 2nd February, 1996 was filed as per which the deceased and the second Appellant were allowed to live separately in a city called Hissar instead of the village Kheri Barki, where they were earlier living. There was also one affidavit sworn to by the father of the Appellants 1 and 2 dated 28th January, 1996 which was also referred to in support of the said compromise. Thereafter, the couple started living in Hissar on and after 31st January, 1996. On the fateful day, i.e. 13th May, 1996, when the Appellants 1 and 3 visited the place of abode of the deceased and the second Appellant at 3/3:30 p.m., as per the Dying Declaration of the deceased made under Exhibits PE and PL/4 in spite of the deceased offering lemon juice to all of them, while rejecting her offer, the second Appellant mercilessly beat her, and the third Appellant and the first, Appellant by uttering harsh words towards her as to her failure to bring enough dowry, further beatings were carried out and at the end the mother-in-law namely, the third Appellant poured kerosene oil upon her and also threw a lighted match stick. By virtue of the fire inflicted on her, the deceased stated to have suffered 100 percent burn injuries and that the second Appellant who attempted to save her by pouring water on her also suffered 25 percent burn injures. In the Dying Declaration, she also mentioned that in the course of the said' occurrence injuries were inflicted upon her by both the Appellants. Immediately after she was shifted to the hospital, she made a statement to P.W. 9 A.S.I., at 5:20 p.m. under Exhibit PE with the certificate of the Doctor, P.W. 1. Subsequently at 7:17 p.m. she made another Declaration before the Duty Magistrate P.W. 8 after necessary formalities relating to the Dying Declaration were carried out. The FIR was registered at 8:20 p.m. for the offences under Sections 498A, 307 read with 34 Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, after the deceased died at 5:25 p.m. on 14th May, 1996, the offence was altered as one under Section 304B as well. It is in the above stated factual scenario, the Appellants came to be charge sheeted for offences under Sections 498A, 304B read with 34 Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The trial Court after due consideration of the evidence led before it convicted the first and second Appellants under Section 498A and imposed a sentence of three years while the third Appellant was convicted for offence under Section 304B who was sentenced with life imprisonment. By the impugned judgment, the High Court while upholding the judgment of the trial Court, however, modified the conviction even as against the Appellants 1 and 2 under Section 304B and enhanced the sentence from 3 years to 7 years.