RATTAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dtd. 5/8/2017 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the FIR in the instant case was registered on the basis of the statement of complainant-Rattan Kumar. It was alleged by the complainant that on 8/7/2015, he along with his family was present in his home. At about 12:50 PM, their neighbourer Davinder Singh came to their house and told that he has received one phone call from his elder brother-Harminder Singh to the effect that Rajinder Kumar, who is younger brother of the complainant, had told him (Harminder Singh) on phone that he has consumed some poisonous substance. On receiving this information, he along with his cousin brother Yashpal, reached at the place where Rajinder Kumar was stated to be present. On reaching there, they found that Rajinder Kumar was lying in unconscious condition on a cot, outside the room of electric motor (of tubewell in the field). They took Rajinder Kumar to the hospital, where, he breathed his last. Therefore, the treating doctor declared him dead. It was further alleged that while going to the hospital, the complainant removed the pant and shirt of Rajinder Kumar. On checking his pant, one written note was found, which was, supposedly, suicide note dtd. 13/4/2015. It was written in the suicide note that Rajinder Kumar Raju, the deceased, was to recover an amount of Rs.8.00 lacs from Rinku Suniari, the accused in this case. Despite repeated demands, the accused was not returning the money. After sometime, she stopped even picking up the phone calls of the deceased. Rather, she started threatening the deceased from mobile No. 93561-47714. Besides Rinku Suniari, another person named in the suicide note was Surjit Kumar Sodhi. Therefore, it was written in the suicide note that if something happened to the deceased, then, both these persons would be responsible. Thereafter, the poisonous substance was consumed by the deceased on 8/7/2015, as stated above. On these facts, the FIR was registered.

(3.) The prosecution led the evidence.