VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Kumar has filed the present appeal to challenge the conviction and sentence recorded against him under Sections 304-B and 498-A I.P.C. by the Sessions Judge, Rupnagar on 4.11.1995.

(2.) THE facts of the cases, as brought out in the testimony of the witnesses for the prosecution, are that the marriage of Veena Kumari with the appellant was solemnised about 2-1/2 years prior to her death. At that time, sufficient dowry was given to the accused. After about 2-1/2 months of the marriage, Vinod Kumar, his brothers Naresh Kumar and Parmod Kumar and mother Sheela Kumari had started harassing the decreased by expressing their dis- satisfaction with the quantum of dowry brought by her. Sarcastically, they used to remark about their having got into alliance with bankrupts (Bhuke Nange Admian Nal Wah Pe Gaya Hai). The four of them had been demanding more dowry and taunting Smt. Veena Kumari about her having brought less dowry but her father and other members of her family expressed the inability to accede to their demand. On 16.4.1993, Veena Kumari together with Vinod Kumar appellant had visited the house of her parents where Vinod Kumar demanded an amount of Rs. 25,000/-, which was required by him to make the good shortfall of the price of the tractor, which he wanted to purchase. Vinod Kumar also threatened his in-laws that in case the demand is not complied with, Smt. Veena Kumari would not be rehabilitated in the matrimonial home. As the demand was not acceded to, Vinod Kumar while returning from the house of his in-laws had left Smt. Veena Kumari with them. After a few days, the parents of the deceased had taken her back to the house of her in-laws and handed over a sum of Rs. 5000/- to them. She was still maltreated and a demand for a scooter was raised before her parents. 1-1/2 months prior to her death, Smt. Veena Kumari had gone to the house of her parents and again narrated her plight to her bother and indicated that in case the demand for scooter is not fulfilled, she would be killed. On 14.1.1994, Ravinder Kumar and the members of his family came to know that the accused had caused the death of Smt. Veena Kumari by setting her alight after sprinkling kerosene oil on her on account of the fact that the demand for dowry had not been complied with or that she had committed suicide by pouring kerosene oil on her body on account of the harassment that she was suffering at the hands of her in-laws.

(3.) ON going through the challan and finding that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial.