JAIPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Jai Pal appellant has come up in appeal to this Court against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Bhiwani dated 27/7/1983 convicting and sentencing the appellant R.I. for ten years under section 306 Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Kamla, since deceased aged about 16/17 years was married to the appellant about 1 years before the occurrence which is alleged to have taken place on 22/8/1982. Kamla went to her in laws house 3/4 times only and stayed there for a total period of one month in all at different intervals. Whenever she visited her parents house she used to tell them that her husband and mother-in-law were maltreating her for bringing inadequate dowry. They wanted her to bring more dowry from her parents. Hawa Singh father of Kamla, since deceased had spent at out Rs. 11.000/- on her marriage. Kamla has left her parentsT house for her in laws house on 18.8.1982. Kamla died on 22.8.82. No one from the side of the appellant informed the parents of Kamla. However, Hawa Singh P.W. father of Kamla, since deceased, learnt on 238.1982 about the death of Kamla. She was cremated by the appellant and his family members, but no intimation was sent to Hawa Singh P.W. Ran Singh P.W. 2 uncle of Kamla was informed by Umed Singh, his nephew that some people had told him that on 22.8.1982 Kamla was given beating by the appellant and she then went out to jump into a well. After informing Hawa Singh P.W. Ran Singh lodged a written complaint Exhibit P.A. with the S.H.O. Police Station, Leharu on 24.8.1982. However, case under section 306 Indian Penal Code against the appellant was registered on 2.9.1982 Bhagat Singh A.S.1. P.W. 5 who was entrusted with the investigation of the case stated that he had directed the complainant to be present in the village on 24.10.1982. Nobody else knew about the occurrence in the village. He further stated in the cross-examination that he was informed by the residents of the village of the appellant that Kamla did not die of drawing, but died of stomach ache. Had Singh P.W. 7 started investigation on 2.9.1982. He recorded the statements of the villagersincluding the Sarpanch and Lambardar and also interrogated the members of the family of the appellant, but he could not Jay his hand on any evidence to substantive the allegations made by Ran Singh in his complainant, upto 23/9/1982.

(3.) The evidence in this case mainly consists of the statement of Ran Singh P.W. 2 uncle of Kamla deceased, Hawa Singh P.W. 2, father of the deceased and Brahma Nand P.W. 3 another relation of Hawa singh belonging to his village. Unfortunately since DO autopsy was performed on the dead body of Kamla, there is no evidence on the record regarding the cause of her death. Umed Singh who is alleged to have supplied the information about the death of Kamla to Ran Singh P.W. has not been produced as a witness in the case. Even according to Ran Singh somebody in Digawa Mandi had informed Umed Singh about the death of Kamla and the name of that person who informed Umed Singh has not been ascertained by the prosecution. This appeals to be a case of absolutely no evidence. Even this has not been established that Kamla committed suicide. So there could be no question of any evidence regarding abetment. Mr. AS. Nehra, learned counsel for th appellant has also placed reliance o Raj Kumar v. The State of Punjab a Division Bench authority of this Court, where their Lordships were pleased to hold that there must be specific evidence for abetment to bring home the charge to the accused.