SUNEHRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/complainant challenges correctness of judgment dated 10.01.2014, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Court for Heinous Crime Against Women), Hisar, acquitting respondents No.2 to 4 (herein) of charges under Section 304 -B/34 of the IPC.

(2.) COUNSEL for the appellant submits that admittedly, Suvita, daughter of the complainant met an unnatural death by drowning. The prosecution has adduced evidence, on record, to prove that sufficient dowry was given at the time of marriage, gifts were given at the time of birth of a boy and thereafter a girl. The prosecution has also adduced evidence to prove that the respondents were not satisfied and soon before the death, demanded an LCD TV and a fridge. The demand of dowry having been corroborated by statements of prosecution witnesses has been wrongly rejected. It is further submitted that the appellant/complainant has deposed that the deceased was beaten up by the respondents and thereafter drowned in the village pond but his deposition has neither been considered nor appreciated in accordance with law. The death admittedly being unnatural, onus lies upon the respondents to explain the factum of this unnatural death.

(3.) WE have heard counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment.