SATWANT KAUR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved against the impugned judgment dated 13.08.2012 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kaithal, whereby appeal of the petitioner was dismissed, upholding the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 12.12.2008, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal, petitioner has approached this Court, by way of instant criminal revision petition.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as recorded by learned Sessions Judge in para 2 of the impugned judgment, are that the complainant Satwant Kaur filed a criminal complaint against the respondents-accused before the learned Illaqa Magistrate for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short). The same was forwarded to the SHO, Police Station City Kaithal for investigation and and registration of the case under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short). On the basis of that complaint, the present case was registered. In the said complaint, the complainant alleged that she was married with accused No.1 (Baljinder Singh) on 18.06.1997 as per Anand Karaj at Siwan, District Kaithal. Thereafter, the complainant lived as wife with accused No.1 at Jind upto 25.06.1997 when she came back to village Siwan to her parental house. On 07.07.1997, she was taken back to the matrimonial home by accused No.1 and 2. She further alleged that accused No.2 & 3 are her parents-in-law. The parents had spent a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on her marriage and gave sufficient articles to her in dowry. All the jewellery articles and clothes were entrusted to accused No.3 by the father of complainant. The cash amount was entrusted to her husband and other articles were entrusted to here father-in-law, in the presence of Man Singh son of Kartar Singh, resident of Village Harnoli and Daler Singh son of Lal Singh, resident of Village Baknor. It is further alleged that on 08.07.1997 just on the next day when the complainant was taken back to the matrimonial home, she was given beatings by all the accused and was turned out of the matrimonial home. They raised demand of a colour television, Hero Honda Motorcycle, gold chain and gold karrah. All the accused were not happy with the dowry given at the time of marriage. The family members of the complainant convened a panchayat to persuade the respondents-accused and settle the complainant in the matrimonial home but in vain. On 15.03.1998, the complainant along with her father was going to Sabzi Mandi, Kaithal when all the accused along with some other persons came there in a jeep and caused beatings to the complainant and her father. The complainant moved an application in this regard to SHO Police Station City Kaithal but regarding that matter a compromise was effected between the parties on 26.03.1998. After compromise, the complainant and accused No.1 started living at Kaithal in a rented house. Accused No.2 & 3 used to instigate accused No.1 against the complainant. On 23.10.1998 when the complainant and accused No.2 were living in the house of Gulshan Kumar Sharma at New Ashoka Colony, Kaithal, accused No.1 dragged the complainant by catching her from her hair inside the kitchen and bolted the same from inside and attempted to set her on fire by opening the LPG but due to intervention of the landlord of the house, she was saved from accused No.1. Thereafter, Gulshan Kumar Sharma, landlord of the house telephonically informed the father of the complainant about this episode. On receipt of that message, the father of complainant came to Kaithal and took her with him to Siwan. On 11.01.1998, the father of complainant convened a panchayat at Geeta Bhawan, Kaithal but the accused did not turn up. Despite repeated demands, the respondentsaccused refused to return the Stridhan to the complainant. On these allegations, the complainant filed the present complaint.

(3.) After registration of the case on the basis of abovesaid complaint filed by the complainant, the investigation was carried out. The accused were arrested. In the pre-charge evidence, complainant produced 07 witnesses, besides producing other documentary evidence. Accused were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 498-A IPC. After closing the evidence by the complainant, statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused denied all the allegations, pleaded false implication and claimed complete innocence. In their defence, accused tendered copy of judgment passed by this Court in FAO-M-168-2001.