KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 9/13/9.1995, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, convicting the accused appellant under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC, and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC and also to undergo RI for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for 6 months under Section 498-A IPC and directing the substantive sentences to run concurrently. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 8.2.1993 at 4.30 P.M. Bhagwan Singh, PW made statement Ex.PB before ASI Sharni Ram at Bus Stand Mirzapur. It was alleged in the said statement that he was working as a Block Officer in the Forest Department at Adampur and had 5 children including three daughters and two sons. It was alleged that his eldest daughter Asha Rani, deceased aged 19 years was married in July or September 1989 with accused Krishan Kumar. It was alleged that from the very day of marriage, his daughter Asha Rani was being taunted by her mother-in-law Smt. Chandro Devi, father-in-law Phool Singh, her Jeth Satbir Singh and her husband Krishan Kumar for bringing less dowry, saying that her father roams about on a motorcycle but cannot give a scooter to his son-in-law. It was alleged that he had told his daughter that she should tell her in-laws that he was a poor man and he had given sufficient dowry according to his capacity and that he was not in a position to give scooter to them but they continued harassing his daughter. It was alleged that 4 months back his daughter had visited their house at Bhattu Kalan and at that time his son-in-law accused Krishan Kumar had come to leave her. It was alleged that at that time accused Krishan Kumar had made his demand before him and his wife Sunehri Devi that either a scooter or a plot should be given to him otherwise he would harass their daughter. It was alleged that on 4.2.1993, his son-in-law, accused Krishan Kumar had come to their house at Bhattu Kalan and had told his wife Smt. Sunehri Devi that they had not arranged any scooter or plot for him and that if they would not arrange a scooter or plot for him, then their daughter would not remain alive. It was alleged that thereupon his wife had promised to give a plot or scooter to accused Krishan Kumar and thereafter he had taken their daughter with him from Bhattu Kalan to Niyana, on the previous day at about 11 a.m. It was alleged that on that day i.e. on 8.2.1993, at about 9 or 10 a.m. accused Satbir Singh (Jeth) alongwith 4-5 other persons came to him and told that his daughter was seriously ill and that he had been called there, whereupon his younger brother Ved Parkash, his uncle Shammi Nath, his wife Smt. Sunehri Devi alongwith 3-4 other persons had accompanied him and they had reached Village Niyana and on reaching there, they found that his daughter Asha Rani was lying dead. It was alleged that accused Krishan Kumar, accused Phool Singh, accused Chandro Devi and accused Satbir Singh had murdered his daughter for the lust of dowry and that action be taken against them. After recording the statement Ex.PB made by Bhagwan Singh, ASI Sharni Ram sent the same to the police station with his endorsement Ex.PB/1, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PB/2 under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 34 IPC was registered in PS Sadar Hisar at 5.10. a.m. on 8.12.1993.

(2.) AFTER registration of the FIR, the case was investigated by the police, inquest proceedings were held, post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased was conducted, accused were arrested in this case and after completion of the investigation challan was submitted in the court. Learned Additional Sessions Judge charged all the accused i.e. accused Krishan Kumar, Satbir Singh, Phool Singh and Smt. Chandro Devi under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC, to which charges all the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined its witnesses. Thereafter the statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded in which they denied the prosecution allegations against them and stated that they were innocent and had been falsely implicated in this case. Accused Krishan Kumar stated that his brother Satbir Singh accused, his father Phool Singh and mother Smt. Chandro Devi accused used to live separately. He stated that he was having cordial relations with his wife and stated that his wife had died natural death. He stated that he was employed as a Jawan with Central Reserve Police Force and used to come to his house once or twice in a year for few days only and for most of the time his wife used to stays with her parents. He stated that he and his co-accused who were falsely implicated in this case. Similar statements were made by the other co-accused and they stated that they never made any demand for dowry etc., nor they even harassed the deceased. The accused, however, did not produce any evidence in their defence. After hearing both sides and after perusing the record, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted all the other three accused namely Satbir Singh, Phool Singh and Smt. Chandro Devi of the charges framed against them, but convicted and sentenced the accused appellant namely Krishan Kumar (Husband) for the charges under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC and sentenced him as referred to above vide judgment and order dated 9/13.9.1995. Aggrieved against the same, accused Krishan Kumar filed the present appeal in this court.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the accused appellant submitted before us that the accused appellant was employed as a Sepoy in Central Reserve Police Force and that nothing has come on the record to show that the accused appellant was on leave or otherwise on the day of the occurrence and was available at his village i.e. Village Niyana at the time of occurrence. However, we find no merit in this submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. If accused Krishan Kumar was taking the plea of alibi, in our opinion, it was for him to produce cogent evidence on record to show that in fact he was not available in the village at the time of occurrence. No such evidence was led by the accused appellant in this regard. On the other hand, in reply to question No. 24 put to him under Section 313 Cr.P.C., accused appellant Krishan Kumar stated that he and his other co-accused were arrested by the police from their house on 8.2.1993 and they were falsely implicated in this case. Thus, as per his own statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., accused appellant Krishan Kumar was admitting his presence at his house on 8.2.1993 and occurrence in this case had also taken place on 8.2.1993. Thus it could not be said that accused appellant Krishan Kumar was not available in his village Niyana at the time of occurrence.