OM PRAKASH & ANR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Fir was registered on the basis of a statement of Nain Singh (PW-1) against the Appellants under Sections 498 A, 304 B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC'). According to the FIR, Kamla was married to Shyam Sunder, son of Jodh Raj (Appellant No.2) on 19th April, 1992. She was consistently being harassed by Shyam Sunder for insufficient dowry. As Kamla was resisting the demand, she was beaten by Shyam Sunder at the instigation of the Appellants. Appellant No.1 is the brother of Shyam Sunder. The family members of deceased made attempts to speak to Shyam Sunder and the Appellants not to trouble Kamla for dowry, all in vain. Information was received on 13.03.1997 that Kamla died on the night of 12.03.1997. Immediately, they rushed to the village Ramgarh where the Appellants and the deceased were living. They came to know that Kamla died in the intervening night of 11/12.03.1997. It was stated in the FIR that the informant believed that the Appellants and Shyam Sunder had burnt the dead body of Kamla after causing her death and had thrown the ashes into Jamuna river.

(2.) After completion of investigation, the Appellants and Shyam Sunder were charged under Sections 304 B and 201 IPC. Shyam Sunder was convicted under Section 304 B IPC and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment. The Appellants were convicted under Section 201 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs.1,000/-. The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the Appellants and Shyam Sunder affirming the conviction and sentences imposed on them by the Trial Court. While issuing notice in the SLP filed by the Appellants, this Court dismissed the SLP filed by Shyam Sunder. In this appeal, we are concerned with the conviction and sentence of the Appellants under Section 201, IPC.

(3.) After considering the evidence on record, the Trial Court found that the dead body of Kamla was hurriedly cremated before her family members reached the village of the accused. The Trial Court accepted the case of the prosecution that Kamla's death was unnatural. The allegations made against the Appellants by the prosecution witnesses regarding the demand of dowry and harassment were not accepted by the Trial Court. However, the demand of dowry by Shyam Sunder and the physical assault by him on the deceased was held proved. The oral evidence that the Appellants instigated Shyam Sunder to beat the deceased Kamla was not believed by the Trial Court. On the basis of the said findings, Shyam Sunder was convicted under Section 304 B. However, the Appellants were acquitted under Section 304 B as the Trial Court did not find any reliable evidence regarding the harassment meted out by the Appellants on the deceased.