KIRAN WATI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, who is mother of deceased Smt. Kavita, has filed the present appeal for challenging the judgment dated 28.8.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon whereby respondents No.2 to 4, hereinafter referred to as 'the accused', were acquitted of the charges under Sections 498 -A and 304 -B read with Section 34 IPC, or, in the alternative, under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.

(2.) THE marriage of Smt. Kavita was solemnized with accused Devender on 20.1.2009. However, her husband Devender, father -inlaw Sukhram, mother -in -law Mishri, brothers -in -law Naresh and Ashok, sisters -in -law Geeta and Rekha and Nanad Meena used to harass her in connection with dowry. In this regard complainant Hari Kishan, father of the deceased, had moved a complaint against them, which was compromised. Despite that, the deceased was sent to her parents' home. On 5.11.2013, Devender refused to take her back. On 8.11.2013, the deceased was sent, alongwith her brother Deepak, to the matrimonial home. On 9.11.2013, the complainant learnt that she had been strangulated to death by her in -laws. Accordingly, complainant Hari Kishan submitted a written complaint to the police and on its basis, FIR No.452 dated 9.11.2013 under Sections 498 -A, 304 -B read with Section 34 IPC was registered against the accused and their members at Police Station Kherki Daula. Upon completion of investigation, the challan was presented only against the accused/respondents. They were subsequently charged for committing the offences punishable under Sections 498 -A and 304 -B read with Section 34 IPC, or, in the alternative, under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. However, the trial ended with their acquittal. Hence, the present appeal by mother of the deceased.

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the appellant, this Court finds that in order to prove the commission of the offences for which the accused were charged, the prosecution examined PW2 Hari Kishan and PW3 Deepak, father and brother, respectively of the deceased. Both of them did not support the prosecution case. Instead, they testified that the deceased had been living happily in her matrimonial home. She was neither harassed nor tortured on account of demand of dowry by her husband and in -laws. PW1 Sher Singh, cousin of the deceased supported the case of the prosecution during his examination -in -chief. However, in his cross -examination, he stated that the deceased was never harassed or beaten. He also stated that in his previous statement Ex.DA he had not stated about the accused throwing the deceased out of their house. He also did not mention in Ex.DA that the accused used to tease her on several occasions. He further stated that he had not mentioned in Ex.DA that accused used to demand various sums of money.