SANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE judgment and order dated August 8, 1996, appellant- accused was convicted for commission of an offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) THIS case pertains to death of Suman daughter of Yudhishter Prashad, complainant, on December 2, 1993. It was case of the prosecution that deceased was a student of X class and on November 27, 1993, when she was returning from School to her house, appellant-accused met her and struck his elbow against the deceased with intend to tease her. She told about the occurrence to her father, who assured her to enquire about the incident from the appellant- accused. On that very day, complainant met the appellant in front of his house. When complainant enquired about the incident, appellant started misbehaving with him, on account of which he was given beating. After two days, i.e., on December 1, 1993, at about 7 P.M., when appellant's father came to know about beating of his son by the complainant, he came to complainant's shop and asked them as to why he had beaten his son, the appellant. Gulzar Singh and Veer Singh PWs were present at the shop of complainant at the time of incident. When complainant and Ram Bahadur, father of the appellant, were talking to each other, appellant came there and in a loud voice stated that not only he had teased the deceased but had also raped her. He also threatened that if she went out of house, he would kill her. These utterances were heard by the deceased and her mother Lalita Rani, who were standing at the first floor of the house. On being pacified by Gulzar Singh and Veer Singh, appellant and his father went back. On December 2, 1993, deceased refused to go to School on the pretext, that she had a stomach ache but actually she was worried about the threat given by the appellant the previous night. She was also feeling ashamed because of that. At about 9.30 A.M., complainant along with his wife Lalita Rani went to his shop. At about 10.30 A.M., he came to know that his house had caught fire. He rushed to the house and found that his daughter Suman was lying burnt and unconscious. He took her to Civil Hospital, Yamuna Nagar, where she breathed her last at 3.40 P.M. on the same day.

(3.) IT is not necessary to refer further details of this case as Shri M.S. Khera, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the appellant, confined his arguments to quantum of sentence only. Before arguing his case for reduction in sentence, he, by referring to the facts of this case, stated that in view of evidence on record, it is even doubtful as to whether any abetment to commit suicide was made by the appellant-accused in this case. In that regard, he has referred to the statements of defence witnesses. He has also brought it to the notice of the Court that appellant-accused was only 22 years of age at the time of alleged occurrence. He had faced agony of trial, which came to an end on August 8, 1996. Since then, his appeal is pending. During this period, he had suffered financially as well as mentally. He has also brought it to the notice of the Court that during pendency of the appeal, appellant had got married and now he has grown up children and if at this stage, he is sent behind the bars, not only he, but his family would suffer. He also argued that complainant and appellant are co-villagers and if the appellant is directed to undergo remaining part of the sentence, it will revive old bad days and bring more hatred, which will not be conducive towards peace and harmony in the village. He further stated that during trial and after his conviction, appellant has already undergone about five months of imprisonment.