STATE OF HARYANA Vs. OM SINGH AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this criminal miscellaneous petition, the State of Haryana seeks grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 28.1.2006 and order of sentence dated 30.1.2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, whereby respondents, Om Singh and Smt. Darshana Devi were acquitted by him.

(2.) In brief, the facts are that on 23.8.2003, the complainant -Ramphal son of Giani Ram, agriculturist by profession, resident of Village Lal, PS Jatusana, District Rewari came to P.S.Sadar, Charkhi Dadri and got recorded his statement to the effect that marriage of one of his daughters Meeta was solemnized on 18.2.2001 with Sanjay son of Om Singh, resident of Village Neemli. After about six months of the marriage of her daughter, her in -laws, i.e. mother -in -law Darshana, father -in -law Om Singh and husband -Sanjay started harassing her for bringing less dowry. They raised demand of a scooter and cash amount. In the month of March, 2003, she came to visit her parents and told them that she was often deprived of meals. On 17th of August, 2003, she returned to her matrimonial home. On 23.8.2003, a telephonic message was received from Village Neemli that Meeta was seriously ill. Thereupon, he along with his cousin Mange Ram and other family members went to Village Neemli and found Meeta lying dead on a cot. A rope was found tied with the hook of the ceiling of the room. He had firm belief that Meeta had been strangulated to death for not fulfilling the demand of dowry by her in -laws. Accordingly, FIR No. 165 dated 23.8.2005 under Sec. 304B read with Sec. 34, IPC was registered by ASI Des Raj. On the basis of the allegations, the respondents along with Sanjay were charge -sheeted under Ss. 304B and 498A read with Sec. 34, IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. After trial, the respondents, Om Singh and Smt.Darshana Devi were held entitled to be given benefit of doubt and so they were acquitted of the alleged offences under Ss. 304B and 498A read with Sec. 34, IPC. Hence, the State of Haryana has come to this Court by way of this criminal miscellaneous petition for grant of leave to appeal.

(3.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the record with their assistance.