GOPI @ HUKAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gopi @ Hukam (A-1) and Shanti Devi (A-2) question the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 17.07.1999 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 2/98 arising out of FIR No. 978/97 PS Mangolpuri by which they were held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 498A/304B IPC read with Section 34 IPC and were awarded RI for seven years each under Section 304B IPC. The facts projected in the charge-sheet are as under :

(2.) Hemlata, PW-1 (Babu Lal)'s daughter was married to A-1 on 17.05.1997. Various dowry articles were given to her by her parents according to their financial capacity. After the marriage, Hemlata lived at her matrimonial home i.e. House No. I-735, Mangolpuri. It is the case of the prosecution that after marriage, she had to face harassment and cruelty at the hands of her husband and his mother in connection with the demand for dowry. When she was unable to bear the harassment and cruelty meted out to her, on 05.10.1997 at about 11.30 A.M., she poured kerosene and set herself ablaze. She suffered 95% - 98% burn injuries on her body and was taken to ESI Hospital, New Delhi by A-1, her husband. Daily Diary (DD) No. 43B (Ex.PW-10/A) was recorded at 03.25 P.M. on 5.10.1997 at PS Mangolpuri after getting information of the incident and the investigation was assigned to SI Prakash Chand who with Const. Raja Ram went to the hospital and collected Hemlata's MLC (Ex.PW-2/A).

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence in its correct perspective and ignored material contradictions in the statements of PWs-1, 5, 7, 8 & 9 without valid reasons. There was no demand of dowry at the time of marriage and allegations regarding harassment or cruelty in connection with dowry demands emerged only after the sad demise. Prior to occurrence, none had any grievance about the conduct and behaviour of the appellants. Neither the deceased nor her parents ever lodged any complaint with any authority for physical or mental torture to the deceased. Rekha, deceased's sister, staying in the matrimonial home did not inform her parents or any relative regarding the cruelty meted out to her. The provisions of Sections 304B/498A IPC were not attracted as there was no cogent and worthwhile evidence on record to establish that 'soon before death', Hemlata was tortured on account of non-fulfilment of dowry demands. The Trial Court did not give weightage to the material inconsistencies in the statements of PW-2 (Dr.R.K.Sharma) and PW-6 (R.L.Sharma, SDM) regarding obtaining of thumb impression of the deceased on the dying declaration. It does not contain a truthful version of what actual had happened. It was recorded on the next day of the incident and there was every possibility of her parents to tutor her. The real and immediate cause for committing suicide was that Hemlata was unable to stand or walk due to incurable disease for which she was getting regular medical treatment. Since, she had affairs with a boy in the neighbourhood before marriage and was forced to marry A-1, she was not happy to stay in the matrimonial home. She was frustrated and depressed due to her illness. Per contra, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State vehemently opposed the appeal contending that Hemlata, 26 years old girl died within six months of her marriage in the matrimonial home. The appellants doubted her fidality alleging that she had developed relations with a neighbour and wanted to marry him. The dying declaration recorded by a responsible Officer clearly implicates them for her death. The other witnesses examined by the prosecution have corroborated her version without major variations.