JAI BHAGWAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant-Jai Bhagwan has filed the present appeal against the impugned judgment and order dated 13/15.5.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, whereby respondents- Surta Ram and Santro Devi were acquitted of the charges under Sections 304-B and 406 IPC, while respondent-Rajender was convicted under Section 304-B IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. The appellant has prayed for setting aside the impugned judgment to the extent of acquitting respondents-Surta Ram and Santro Devi of the charges against them and for enhancement of sentence of imprisonment of respondentRajender.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, as set up at the trial, was that the marriage of Reeta, since deceased, daughter of the appellant wasCriminal solemnized with Rajender on 7.12.2007. Although sufficient dowry was given in the marriage, yet the accused i.e. husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased were not happy with the same and as such, they used to torture and taunt her for bringing inadequate dowry. Accused first demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- and, thereafter, another amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. As their demands were not met by the appellant, the deceased was harassed and tortured and ultimately, she ended her life on 29.8.2012.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant, at the outset, submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the present appeal to the extent of seeking enhancement of sentence of respondent-Rajender with liberty to the appellant to seek any other remedy available under the law. He, however, submits that the trial Court has wrongly acquitted respondentsSurta Ram and Santro Devi of the charges against them. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and on going through the impugned judgment, this Court finds that respondents-Surta Ram and Santro Devi had been living separately from the deceased and her husband-Rajender. This fact was corroborated by PW-10 ASI Ajaib Singh, who testified that he found Surta Ram and Santro Devi living separately from Rajender and his wife Reeta, since deceased, during her life time. Further, the prosecution has not led sufficient evidence to establish that Surta Ram and Santro Devi made any demand either of Rs.50,000/- or Rs.1,00,000/- from the parents of the deceased or harassed and tortured the deceased for or in connectionCriminal with the demand of dowry. Moreover, any such demand, if met, would have benefitted Rajender accused and not Surta Ram and Santro Devi.