SANJIV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.9.1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, acquitting accused, namely, Om Parkash and Rajiv of the charges but convicting accused-appellants Sanjiv Kumar and Tripta Kumari for offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC, for which they have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and three years with fine of 5,000/- each respectively and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further RI for nine months. Both the sentences were, however, directed to run concurrently. The amount of fine, on realization, was ordered to be paid to the parents of deceased Jeevan Jyoti. Brief facts of the case are that Ajay Kumar lodged an FIR on 23.1.1996 alleging that his father Joginder Ram is serving in Saudi Arabia. The marriage of his daughter Jeevan Jyoti was performed with Sanjiv Kumar on 14.10.1995. Om Parkash is the father of Sanjiv Kumar, Tripta Kumari is the mother while Rajiv Kumar is the younger brother. Sufficient dowry was given to them at the time of marriage. However, after few days, when he(complainant) went to see his sister, Rajiv Kumar who was running a refrigerator shop, had demanded Rs.50,000/- for expansion of his business but in turn he(complainant) told him that his father is out of India and they are not in a position to pay the amount. After some time, accused started Cr.A.No.834-SB of 1997 2

(2.) maltreating and taunting Jeevan Jyoti and coercing her to bring money from her parents. Complainant again visited his sister s house after about 15-20 days when she again complained of harassment and about the demand of Sanjiv Kumar for providing of car from Car Bazar, Ludhiana. He (complainant) suggested them not to maltreat Jeevan Jyoti and should wait for his father for talks. He though made a request to send his sister with him to which they refused. Subsequently, on the occasion of Lohri, Jeevan Jyoti had informed through her letter about the harassment and snatching of her gold ornaments. Subsequent thereto, Sheela Rani mother of Jeevan Jyoti had visited her along with gifts of Rs.20,000/- for all the family members in her in-laws house. She also requested the accused not to maltreat Jeevan Jyoti and requested them to send Jeevan Jyoti with her, upon which it was remarked that she would be sent only if a car is provided otherwise she can be taken for ever. Sheela Rani on return told this fact to Ajay Kumar(complainant) who then went to visit her sister but was not allow to meet her. On 22.1.1996, at about 3 PM, complainant Ajay Kumar received an information on telephone that a hot water geyser had fallen on Jeevan Jyoti and he should come immediately. Ajay Kumar and Sheela Rani went to Kapurthala where they came to know that Jeevan Jyoti had been removed to C.M.C. Ludhiana and they then went there. Then, it is stated that Jeevan Jyoti regained consciousness and made statement and then expired. A case was registered. The police had conducted the usual formalities on reaching the spot. Post-mortem examination of the deceased was also got conducted. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and the accused were arrested.

(3.) Challan against all the accused was filed and the case was committed to the court of Session for trial. Accused were charge-sheeted under Section 498-A/304-B read with Section 34 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution had examined as many as 14 witnesses in support of their case. The accused in their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the allegations and pleaded false implication. Their plea was that Jeevan Jyoti had committed suicide out of frustration as the marriage was against her wishes. In defence, they examined Nand Kishore as DW-1, Sumer Chand as DW-2 and Amarjit Singh as DW-3. Upon appreciation of evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, vide his judgment and order dated 18.9.1997 acquitted Cr.A.No.834-SB of 1997 3