BALWAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE judgment and order dated 15/16.10.1998 learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar, convicted the appellants under Section 304 -B IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. They were also convicted under Section 498 -A IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/ - each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, complainant Chhotu Ram went to P.S.Bhuna and made statement before the police on 19.7.1996 at 2 PM to the effect that marriage of Parwati alias Pari, aged 22/23 years, daughter of his brother Ramji Lal, was solemnized about 1 -1/4 years with Balwan in accordance with Hindu rites. Ramji Lal gave dowry beyond his capacity. After the marriage she went to the house of her husband and when she returned to the house of her father, she told her family members while weeping bitterly that her husband Balwan and mother -in -law Tulsi taunted her that she had brought a ramshackle bed with small sized mattress and her father did not give scooter in the dowry and the articles given in dowry were inadequate. They also threatened her that if she did not bring scooter from her father, it would not be safe for her to live in their house. After about one and a half month when appellant Balwan came to their house for taking Parwati back, the parents of Parwati told him that at that moment they did not have enough money for purchasing a scooter but promised to give him a scooter at the next harvest. Parwati was persuaded to go with her husband to his house where she was kept nicely for sometime but the appellants again started harassing her in connection with their demand for scooter. When her brother Hanuman went to the house of appellant Balwan, Parwati told him that her life was in danger and she would not be allowed to live until a scooter was given to Balwan. Thereafter, Hanuman brought Parwati to his house, where Parwati told her parents and relatives about her harassment. The parents of Parwati did not send Parwati back to the house of her husband for a considerable time. Thereafter, Balwan accompanied by a few of his relatives, came to the house of parents of Parwati and under the pressure and assurance of the relatives of Balwan that she would not be harassed by anybody, she was sent by her parents with Balwan to his house. On 18.7.1996, Hanuman, alongwith Suraj Bhan, husband of Parwati's sister, went to the house of Balwan, where Parwati told them that the appellants were in the habit of giving beatings to her daily and she was not even given food in time. The appellants had made her life very difficult. When Hanuman offered to take Parwati with him to his house, the appellants picked a quarrel with him and did not allow her to accompany Hanuman. Hanuman and Suraj Bhan narrated the incident to their relatives. On 19.7.1996, the complainant, alongwith Hanuman, Jagdish, Ran Singh, Ram Singh and Dewan, went to the village of the appellants for enquiring about the safety of Parwati and when they reached the farm house of appellant Balwan, they found dead body of Parwati hanging from the ceiling of a room with the help of a plastic rope. After leaving Ran Singh and Ram Singh near the dead body, the complainant went to Police Station Bhuna for giving information to the police. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, FIR No. 141 dated 19.7.1996 under Sections 498 -A/304 -B read with Section 34 IPC was registered by ASI Om Parkash.

(3.) UPON completion of investigation, presentation of challan, followed by its commitment to the Court of Sessions, the appellants were charge -sheeted for the offences under Sections 304 -B and 498 -A IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.