JARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant challenges judgment dated 08.02.2013, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sri Muktar Sahib, acquitting respondents No.2 and 3 -Sarabjit Singh and Sukhpal Kaur brother -inlaw and sister -in -law of the deceased for an offence under Section 304 -B of the IPC, and convicting and sentencing Charanjit Singh (husband of the deceased) under Section 304 -B and 498 -A of the IPC.

(2.) COUNSEL for the appellant submits that a perusal of the evidence on record clearly indicates that acquittal of respondents No.2 and 3 is not warranted. The trial Court has held that as respondents No.2 and 3 are residing separately from Charanjit Singh, they cannot be held liable under Section 304 -B and 498 -A of the IPC. A perusal of the evidence on record reveals that this finding is incorrect as Ex.D2 (copy of the ration card) pertaining to Sarabjit Singh reveals that though the respondents have three daughters, the names of only two daughters are mentioned, thereby, clearly proving that the ration card has been manipulated. This apart, the ration card does not bear the date on which it was issued. It is further submitted that as specific allegations have been levelled against the respondents No.2 and 3 relating to demand of dowry etc., the impugned judgment may be set aside.

(3.) CHARANJIT Singh and Ranjit Kaur (deceased) were married on 18.04.2010. The acquitted respondents are Sarabjit Singh (elder brother of Charanjit Singh) and Sukhpal Kaur @ Usha (wife of Sarabjit Singh). Sarabjit Singh and Sukhpal Kaur were mediators of marriage of Charanjit Singh and Ranjit Kaur (deceased). PW -2 Jarnail Singh (father of the deceased) made a statement Ex.PG that at the time of marriage of his daughter, sufficient dowry was given but the accused raised demand for an inverter (generator set). The dispute was settled with the intervention of respectables. The accused had been maltreating the deceased and raising the demand for an inverter. On 10.08.2011 at about 10 to 11 PM, the complainant received a telephone call from the deceased that the accused are raising demand for an inverter and beating her. She also stated that the accused would kill her and, therefore, she should be taken back from the house of her in -laws. After about two hours, the complainant received a telephone call from Charanjit Singh that Ranjit Kaur has consumed a poisonous substance and she is being taken to Kotkapura. When they reached Kotkapura, they received another telephone call from Charanjit Singh asking them to reach G.G.S. Medical College. After some time, they received information that Ranjit Kaur is being taken to Civil Hospital, Kotkapura. When they reached there, they received a telephone call from Charanjit Singh that Ranjit Kaur has passed away and her dead body is being taken to village Harike Kalan. The complainant reached the Civil Hospital, Kotakpura but was informed that no such case has arrived in the hospital. The complainant reached the house of in -laws of her daughter and found that her dead body was lying on a cot in the house. The mother -in -law of his daughter was present alongwith some other ladies whereas three accused and the father -in -law were missing. He could make out that his daughter had been tortured and a poisonous substance has been administered to her. He clicked photographs on his mobile of the 'chobara' where the dead body was lying.