NAVEEN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a criminal appeal filed by Naveen Kumar, husband of Promila, deceased and Smt. Navita, younger sister of the husband of Promila and has been directed against the judgment dated 15-12-1997 and order dated 17-12-1997, passed by the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jind, who convicted the appellants u/Sections 340B/34, 498A. 201, I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of 2 years each u/Section 498A. IPC. The appellants were further directed to; pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each; in default of; payment of fine they were directed to undergo RI. for one month each. Both the appellants were further sentenced u/Section 304-B/34, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 7 years each. Further. u/Section 201, IPC the appellants were sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each; in default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo R.I. for one month each. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The crude facts of the case are as under: Unfortunate lady in this case who died in the house of her husband on 10-10-1994 was Promila. She was married with Naveen Kumar, appellant, on 30-5-1993 and out of this wedlock no child was born. The cause of death of Promila could not be determined as there was no postmortem. The occurrence had taken place in village Bhartana Police Station Pillukhera and the offence was registered vide FIR 108 dated 12-10-1994, at the instance of application, Ex. PA, given by Dr. Bijender Singh the real brother of Promila Devi. Before I proceed further, it may also be mentioned here that on 10-10-1994, Sumitra mother-in-law of Promila, also died in the same house and at one point of time, it was case of the prosecution that Sumitra had committed murder of Promila. Further, it was alleged by the prosecution that present two appellants alongwith Attar Singh. Ram Mehar and Satbir Singh disposed of the dead body of Promila in such a manner so that Naveen Kumar and Navita may be screened from legal punishment.

(3.) Dr.Bijender Singh in the complaint given to the police had alleged that Promila was his younger sister. She was married to Naveen Kumar appellant on 30-5-1993 in village Sisal Khas and sufficient dowry in the shape of Chetak Scooter, Television. Fridge Cooler, Sewing Machine Steel Almirah. Sofa Set, customary ornaments weighing 5 tolas, besides other articles were given at the time of the marriage. The complainant alleged that Naveen Kumar, appellant his mother Sumitra Devi and Navita, appellant, were not satisfied with the dowry articles and for this reason they allegedly started harassing the deceased immediately after the marriage. Promila hardly stayed for one month in the matrimonial home when she came to the house of her parents and brought the entire matter to the notice of her parents with regard to the alleged inadequacy of the dowry. She stayed in the house of her parents for 1h/2 months and then again joined the company of Naveen Kumar. According to the complainant he visited village Bhartana in order to see his sister where the demand of dowry was repeated by the two appellants and their mother. It was informed to the complainant by the deceased that the appellants and their mother wanted cooking gas milk churning machine woolen suits etc. The deceased used to write letters to the complainant complaining about these facts. The complainant further stated that he had been going to the village of the appellants in order to enquire the welfare of his sister where his sister used to complain again and again. Finally Naveen Kumar appellant visited village Sisar Khas along with Promila But the demand of the appellants and their mother Sumitra continued. In all the letters written by the deceased she had been complaining about the alleged maltreatment at the hands of the appellants. On 11-9-1994, Naveen Kumar appellant visited village Sisar Khas in the company of the deceased and made a categorical demand that he would maintain and keep the deceased only if more dowry was given to him. Some assurance was given but the pressure continued from the side of the appellants upon the deceased for bringing dowry articles. On 11-10-1994, the information tricked to the complainant that her sister Promila had been murdered by the appellants and their mother Sumitra. The complainant went to village Bhartana on getting this information and came to know that the dead body of Promila had already been cremated.