HEM CHANDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are aggrieved with the judgment and order of their conviction and sentence dated 27.1.2004 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Rohtak in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2003, by virtue of which all the appellants have been convicted under Sections 304-B and 498-A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for committing an offence under Section 304-B I.P.C. Each of them were required to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default thereof, further imprisonment for a period of three years has been awarded. Since the appellants were convicted for major offence i.e. Section 304-B I.P.C., so, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Smt. Shanti and others v. State of Haryana, 1991(2) RCR(Criminal) 55 : AIR 1991 SC 1226, the trial court did not impose any sentence upon the appellants for committing an offence under Section 498A I.P.C.

(2.) FIRST of all, prosecution version needs to be noticed.

(3.) THE prosecution version further highlights the instance when Smt. Reena Devi was again given beatings for not satisfying the demand of dowry of her in-laws. This time again, the matter was settled with the intervention of Panchayat and Smt. Reena was sent to her matrimonial home with Sunil Kumar.