HANS RAJ Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.9.1986 passed by the Additional Sessions Judges, Kurukshetra, by which Hans Raj, appellant, has been convicted under Section 306 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven years and to pay a sum of Rs. 300/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further R.I. for two months.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, this case was registered on the statement Ex. PE of Munshi Ram English translation whereof reads as under : "I am a resident of Laha Majri and do cultivation. I have four sons and six daughters. My daughter Jeeto Rani was married with Hans Raj s/o Mangu Ram, Bazigar, resident of Kheri Sahidan about three years ago. One daughter was born from the wed -lock of Jeeto and Hans Raj, who is 7 months old and is alive. My son -in -law Hans Raj is addicted to Bhang (hemp) intoxication and was not paying any attention towards home. My daughter Jeeto used to prevent her husband Hans Raj from this addiction and Hans Raj used to beat her. My daughter would come to our house at village Laha Majri, being fedup with the mal -treatment of her husband. I and my wife used to make her understand and would send her back to village Kheri Sahidan. Last Friday, my son -in -law Hans Raj brought back my daughter Jeeto to our house in our village from Kheri and said that he would not keep Jeeto with him. My son Fateh Chand is married with Naro Devi daughter of Mangu Ram, real sister of Hans Raj. Hans Raj told us that Fateh Chand was harassing his sister Naro, therefore, he did not want to keep Jeeto, saying so, he had left the place while leaving Jeeto at our house. My wife Ram Piari and my brother Bahadur Chand, who were also present in the house and myself made Hans Raj to understand, but Jeeto was very frightened and she refused to accompany her husband. We tried to prevail upon our daughter Jeeto that her real house was in her in -laws and she has to live therein thick and thin. Hans Raj and Jeeto stayed at our house for two days. On the third day i.e. Monday, Hans Raj had taken my daughter Jeeto to his village. When, Hans Raj had come to our village, he told us that our son was harassing his sister and that he would take revenge. My son -in -law, Hans Raj, had taken my daughter Jeeto to his village Kheri. Today, at about 10 A.M., Shana Ram s/o. Mangat Ram, Bazigar, resident of Nangal, came to our house and told us that Jeeto was seriously ill and asked me to reach Kheri immediately. Then, I alongwith Bahadur Chand, Nathi Ram, my brother and my wife Piari Devi reached Kheri Sahidan, where we found our daughter Jeeto dead. I have a suspicion that my daughter Jeeto had committed a suicide by taking poison, being fedup with the beatings and the harassment caused by his husband. I have come to the police station to lodge a report. Action be taken." Naro sister of the appellant, was married with Fateh Chand s/o Munshi Ram. Jeeto (deceased), daughter of Munshi Ram and sister of Fateh Chand was married with the appellant about three years ago and was living with the appellant in village Kheri Saidan. A daughter had been born from the wed -lock seven months before her death. On August 24, 1985, Jeeto was found in a precarious condition and Dr. Ram Gopal Sharma (given up as unnecessary) was called by the appellant and his family members for medical treatment of Jeeto. He gave her an injection and, thereafter, she was brought to a clinic at Ismailabad. In the meantime, condition of Jeeto deteriorated and a message had already been sent through a special messenger to the parents of Jeeto and when Munshi Ram, father of Jeeto (deceased) came to the house of the accused, Jeeto was no more. Being not satisfied with the conduct of the accused, who used to give beatings to Jeeto (deceased) and coupled with the fact that few days before the occurrence, appellant Hans Raj had come to leave Jeeto at her parental house, though he was persuaded to take her back to the matrimonial home, Munshi Ram started from the house of the accused for lodging a report with the police but on the way, he met ASI Chaman Lai, (PW -5) near the petrol pump at Ismailabad and got recorded his statement, Ex. PE. After making his endorsement, Ex. PE/1, on the said statement, ASI Chaman Lai sent the same to the police station; on the basis of which formal FIR, Ex. PE/2 was recorded. Thereafter, ASI Chaman Lal visited the place of occurrence, prepared inquest report, Ex.PB and sent dead body of the deceased for post -mortem examination. He also prepared rough site plan, Ex. PG of the place of occurrence and recovered some pills in pursuance of disclosure statement, Ex. PH, made by the appellant and took the same into possession vide recovery memo, Ex. PH/1. These tablets were being used in the house of the appellant to prevent infestation of wheat.

(3.) TO prove its case, the prosecution examined PW -1 Dr. Subhash Chander Grover, PW -2 Munshi Ram, PW -3 Fateh Chand PW -4 Sita Ram, PW -5 Chaman Lal, ASI and PW -6 Jit Ram, Inspector. Besides, reports of the Chemical Examiner, Ex. PJ and Ex. PJ/1 and affidavits, Ex. PK of HC Hari Singh, PK/1 of H.C. Rattan Singh and Ex. PK/2 of Constable Sunil Dutt were also tendered in evidence by the prosecution. Naro Devi, sister of the appellant and Gullu Ram PW were given up as having been won by the accused.