MOHINDER SINGH AND ORS. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 426 -SB of 1993, filed by Mohinder Singh, Pala Ram and Phoola Ram, accused (now appellants) against the judgment of conviction, and the order of sentence dated 22.11.1993, rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide which it convicted the accused (now appellants), for the offences, punishable under Section 304 -B and 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years each, for the offence punishable under Section 304 -B of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo RI for two years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/ - each, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for six months each, for the offence punishable under Section 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code and Criminal Revision No. 69 of 1994 filed by Giani Ram, complainant for the purpose of enhancement of sentence, awarded to the accused. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Nirmala accused was, however, acquitted.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that Saroj daughter of Giani Ram was married to Mohinder Singh on 1.3.1992 at Chandigarh. Mohinder Singh, his brother Pala Ram and their father Phoola Ram, accused came to Giani Ram in the month of May, 1992 and demanded Rs. 10,000/ - to enable them to purchase some property. In pursuance of the demand, the accused were paid a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - on 17.7.1992, at their house, in the area of Ram Darbar. Even thereafter, Mohinder Singh and Pala Ram came to him once again on 21.10.1992 and asked him to give them Rs. 5,000/ - more. He told them that he would arrange the same only by next Diwali. On 24.10.1992, Pala Ram came to Giani Ram again and told him to send the money to them by the following day and then left saying that since Saroj was also in the house, he had to go back. While leaving, he once again reiterated the demand, and held out a threat that, in the event of his non -compliance therewith, something new would come out, on Diwali day. It was stated that on Diwali Day i.e. on 25.10.1992, at about 11 a.m., when Giani Ram went to the house of the accused, with some gifts, his daughter started weeping, on seeing him, and told him that Pala Ram had insulted and even manhandled her physically on the preceding day and he his wife Nirmala and Mohinder Singh continued harassing and pressurizing her to bring more money. Giani Ram, on hearing the tale of woes of his daughter, kept calm. He tried to prevail upon the accused not to harass Saroj, in connection with the demand of dowry. Mohinder Singh and Pala Ram at the juncture also asked Giani Ram, as to whether he had arranged the money for them. Even on that occasion, he hold them that he had not been able to do so, and that he would send the same to them, as and when he would be able to procure the same. He further stated that at about 8.30 p.m. on the same day, he was informed that his daughter had been admitted to P.G.I., with burn injuries. Before he could reach there, she had already expired. He further stated that on enquiries having been made by him, it transpired, that either her daughter had been burnt, by the accused, or that they by their conduct had compelled her to commit suicide, by setting herself ablaze. On the basis of the statement made by Giani Ram. FIR was registered. The statements of witnesses were recorded. The accused were arrested and after the completion of investigation, they were challaned.

(3.) THE prosecution, in support of its case examined Jaswant Singh, Draftsman, PW -1, who prepared the scaled site plan of the place of occurrence, Ex. PA, Dr. S.K. Sharma, PW2 who conducted postmortem examination on the dead -body of deceased Saroj, and found that she had sustained 4th degree deep burns spreading all over her body to the extent of 98% and her death was due to shock on account of burn injuries which were sufficient to cause death, in the ordinary course of nature, Dr. E.V.S. Prabhakar, P. W.4 who admitted Saroj in the emergency ward of the hospital, and informed the Police with regard to her admission, Ujagar Singh, PW5, Panna Lal, PW6, and Shish Pal, PW7, who had sold a watch, a cycle, a wall clock and a TV set to the complainant, on different occasions, for the purpose of giving the same to his deceased daughter, at the time of her marriage. They also produced the receipts Exs. PE, PF, PH and PM against which these articles had been purchased by Giani Ram, HC Sat Guru, PW8, Constables Rishi Pal, PW9, and Raghbir Singh, PW10, remained associated with the Investigating Officer, during the course of investigation. ASI Karnail Singh, PW11, photographer, took four snaps Ex.P1 to Ex.P4, the negatives whereof are Ex.P5 to Ex.P8, Harbans Lal, PW12, depot -holder proved that the accused were ration card holders, and living in the area of Ram Darbar. P.K. Sharma, Executive Magistrate, PW15, stated that he went to the hospital. He further stated that he moved an application (Ex. PC), in writing, to know, as to whether, the deceased was fit to make a statement. He further stated that the doctor opined in the negative, through endorsement Ex. PC/1. He further stated that he was also told by the doctor that although she could nod her head, she was not in a position to understand any question, Mehak Singh, PW17, deposed with regard to the marriage of Saroj with Mohinder Singh. He is the colleague of the father of Saroj deceased. He further stated that he got arranged the marriage of Mohinder Singh with Saroj. He further stated that Giani Ram told him that the accused was asking Saroj to bring money from him. He further stated that they were harassing her in connection with the demand of dowry, Sham Lal, PW19 also stated that Giani Ram told him that Mohinder Singh, Pala Ram his brother, and parents of Mohinder Singh were harassing his daughter in connection with the demand of Rs. 10,000/ - for purchase of property. Sat Pal, PW18, stated that he and Giani Ram were the members of a committee, with an individual contribution of Rs. 21,000/ - and that on 11.5.1992, the latter had told that the accused -persons were harassing his daughter and were asking her to bring some money from him (Giani Ram), He also told him that on account of this reason he had to draw some amount, from the pool, for that purpose, Shri Bhim, PW20, went to the house of the accused with the police after the occurrence. He further stated that he found some pieces of broken bangles, burnt clothes, some match sticks, a bottle of kerosene partly filled and a stove. He further stated that these were taken into possession, by the police, vide separate recovery memo. Giani Ram, complainant, PW21, deposed in terms of the complaint made by him, before the police, on the basis whereof, the FIR was recorded. SI Jai Singh, PW22, conducted investigation, in this case, and proved various memos, prepared by him. Thereafter, the Public. Prosecutor, closed the evidence of the prosecution.