V.V. PARSHANT Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment/order dated 9.9.2003/11.9.2003 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gurgaon vide which the appellant was convicted under Section 498A I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ -, in default, to further undergo RI for six months. The appellant was also convicted under Section 306 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ -, in default, to further undergo RI for one year. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case is based on the statement of the complainant, the father of the deceased who stated that marriage of his daughter was solemnized with the appellant on 6.7.1999 without parental consent to which there was a reluctant reconciliation. He stated that his daughter was being ill -treated in her matrimonial home. The deceased was working as a Postal Assistant since 1.1.2000 and her parents -in -law, unhappy with her assignment, would pressure her to give up her service to become a housewife. A child was born to the couple on 3.6.2000 at the complainant's house but the deceased along with her child left for her matrimonial home barely after 11 days of the delivery. The complainant stated that the deceased was subjected to harassment on account of dowry even though gold and other ornaments were given by the complainant to satiate the repeated demands of the appellant. It was further stated that a sum of Rs. 1 lac was demanded at the time of purchase of a vehicle Opel Astra to replace their earlier vehicle, a Maruti 800. The complainant paid Rs. 20,000/ - in cash and Rs. 30,000/ - through a cheque. The deceased according to the complainant, usually remained upset on account of such harassment where the mother -in -law imposed restrictions upon her visits to her parents. A monthly income scheme account was opened in the name of the deceased by the complainant out of which a sum of Rs. 4,000/ - was withdrawn to meet the demands of the husband of the deceased. On 27.10.2001, the deceased came to the house of the complainant after obtaining the consent of her husband and in -laws. The entire salary of the deceased was utilized by her in laws to meet the needs of the household. On the fateful day, i.e. 29.10.2001, the deceased is said to have a lengthy argument with the appellant over telephone which upset her considerably prompting her to take leave from the office to come to the house of the complainant. At about 1.15 p.m., after spending sometime with the relatives and her daughter, she jumped from the terrace of the house situated on the 5th floor leading to her death.

(3.) CHARGE was framed appropriately to which the appellant pleaded not guilty to claim trial.