VIKRAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been directed by Vikram Singh, father-in- law, Surender, husband and Smt. Sahbo, mother-in-law of Pushpa (since deceased) against the judgment and order dated 19.10.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, whereby they were found guilty and convicted under Sections 306 and 498A read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 8 years and a fine of Rs. 8,000/- each under Section 306 IPC; in default of payment of fine, the defaulter was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years; to undergo R.I. for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 2000/- each under Section 498-A/34 IPC and in default of payment of fine, the defaulter was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of six months. However, both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It was also ordered that out of the fine realised 80% would go to the father of the deceased, Pushpa.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are that Pushpa was the third daughter of PW-10 Dilbag Singh. She was married to appellant Surender in village Aasan in the year 1994 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. At that time, Dilbag Singh had given sufficient dowry but the appellants were not satisfied with the dowry given. They started harassing her. In order to make them happy, PW-10 Dilbag Singh used to give some money to his daughter Pushpa whenever she visited him but the demand of the appellants remained always on the increasing side. They used to beat her. Smt. Pushpa used to tell to her father about the atrocities committed upon her, whenever she visited him. After about two and half years of the marriage, Pushpa had given birth to a daughter, namely, Garima and at that time also, PW-10 Dilbag Singh had given sufficient gifts but the appellants were not satisfied.

(3.) IT was further averred that after their demand was not fulfilled, they became more harsh towards Pushpa and started beating her. Pushpa, then came to Village Khudan and apprised of the cruelty of her in-laws towards her to PW-10 Dilbag Singh. She remained in her parental house for about three months and was taken back by Surender, appellant, only 10 days prior to the occurrence, after giving assurance that she would be treated nicely in the matrimonial house.