BALWINDER MASIH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is against the judgment and order dated 12.11.2003 passed by Sh. C.D. Gupta, Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, vide which the accused -appellants were convicted under Section 498 -A IPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ - each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each.

(2.) SHORN of the unnecessary details, the brief facts of the case are that on 8.9.2000 complainant Munshi Ram went to the Police Station Kahnuwan and lodged a report that his daughter Sunita was married with accused Balwinder Masih on 18.2.1997. Balwinder Masih is serving in CRPF. The complainant gave dowry in the marriage as per his capacity. After some time of marriage, Veero the mother -in -law of Sunita, Bhajan Masih, father -in -law, Balwinder Masih husband and Soma younger brother of Balwinder Masih started maltreating Sunita for bringing less dowry. Sunits used to tell about it to her parents. The complainant and his wife Bashiran went to the house of the accused and made request that they are poor persons and they have given dowry as per their capacity and they should not harass Sunita, but the accused remained harassing Sunita and also giving beatings to her. About 6/7 months before 8.9.2000 Sunita was given beatings by the accused and turned out from their house and Sunita came to the house of her parents and told the whole matter. The complainant, his wife Bashiran, Sarpanch Iqbal Singh and Rachhpal Singh, Member Panchayat of village Sahiapur alongwith Ex -Sarpanch Gurdial Singh went to the house of the accused Balwinder Masih where Balwinder Masih, his mother Veero and father Bhajan Masih and brother Soma were present. The complainant and the Member Panchayat enquired from the accused as to why they were maltreating Sunita and before the Panchayat accused told that the complainant has not given dowry as per their requirement and the scooter was also not given in the dowry and in case they want that Sunita should live peacefully then they should meet their demand. The complainant and Member Panchayat made request to the accused but the accused remained adamant. About 6/7 months before the occurrence, the accused Balwinder Masih and his brother came to the house of the complainant and raised a dispute, but the matter was compromised. On 8.9.2000 complainant came to know from the reliable sources that accused Balwinder Masih came on leave 2/3 days earlier. The accused Balwinder Masih, his mother Veero, father Bhajan Masih and brother Soma gave beatings to Sunita and that Sunita consumed poison on 7.9.2000 and she expired at Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur. It was the firm belief of complainant Munshi Lal that accused administered poison to Sunita and compelled her to commit suicide. Accused were arrested. After completion of the investigation, challan was presented against the accused for trial.

(3.) CHARGE under Section 304 -B IPC was framed against the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution, in order to bring home guilt of the accused, examined PW -1 Dr. Vijay Kumar, PW -2 Munshi Lal complainant, PW -3 SI Sakattar Singh, PW -4HC Pappi Masih, PW -5 ASI Rajesh Kakkar, PW -5/A Bashiran, PW -6 HC Jasbir Singh, PW -7 Constable Bur Singh, PW -8 Constable Balwinder Singh, PW -9 J.S. Dhanjal, Draftsman, PW -10 Iqbal Singh and closed the prosecution evidence.