UDE KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 11.11.1992 and the order of sentence dated 12.11.1992, rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, vide which it convicted the accused/appellant, Ude Kumar and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years, for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court, however, acquitted Renu, Bimla, Madhu and Paras Kumar accused.

(2.) URMILA , daughter of Prem Chand, resident of Samana Mandi (Punjab) was married to Ude Kumar son of Ved Parkash, accused, resident of Chankyapuri, Rohtak on 10.8.1990. From the very beginning, Ude Kumar and the members of his family, were not happy with the dowry articles given by the father of Urmila, at the time of marriage. Thus, they used to tease, taunt and harass her, on the ground, that she had brought insufficient dowry. She was also subjected to cruelty by Ude Kumar and his co-accused (since acquitted). Urmila used to narrate the tale of woes to her parents. Ultimately, on 12.3.1991, at about 11 am i.e. less than one year of her marriage, Urmila died otherwise than under normal circumstances, in the house of her in-laws, on account of burn injuries, on account of her subjection to cruelty, in connection with the demand of dowry by the accused, continuously. When Prem Chand, father of Urmila came to know about the death of her daughter, he made statement Ex.PB, before the police on 13.3.1991, narrating the aforesaid facts, as a result whereof, FIR was registered. The post-mortem, on the dead body of Urmila, was got conducted. The accused were arrested. After the completion of investigation, Ude Kumar,accused and his co-accused ( since acquitted) were challaned.

(3.) THE prosecution, in support of its case, examined Sukhbir Singh, Draftsman, Civil Courts, Rohtak as PW1, who prepared scaled site plan Ex.PA of the place of occurrence. HC Jagat Singh, PW2, Photographer, who took the photographs Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 of the place of occurrence, the negatives whereof were Ex.P6 to Ex.P10. Prem Chand, PW3, father of Urmila, who made a detailed statement, with regard to the date, time and place of occurrence, and harassment being meted out to the deceased at the hands of the accused in connection with the demand of dowry continuously, from the date of her marriage till death. Kamlesh Kumar, PW4, cousin brother of Urmila, who also deposed with regard to the cruelty, being meted out to Urmila, at the hands of the accused, on account of bringing insufficient dowry, right from the day of marriage until her death. Dr. B.N. Sharma, PW5, who was posted as Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Rohtak on 13.3.1991, and conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Urmila and found 100% burns on her body. Her body was smelling of kerosene. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was due to shock and extensive burns, which were ante-mortem, in nature, and were sufficient to cause death, in the ordinary course of nature. Thereafter, the Public Prosecutor for the State, closed the prosecution evidence.