JAGDISH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment/ order of sentence dated 17.2.1998 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Faridabad whereby he convicted and sentenced the accused Jagdish and his mother Khajani to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of the same, the defaulter to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 498-A of IPC and acquitted them of the charge under Section 304-B of IPC.

(2.) TO shorn of all unnecessary details, the facts of the prosecution case are that Rekha, daughter of Harchandi PW4 was married with Jagdish accused on 1.3.1994 at Village Sallagarh (Palwal) as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. On her marriage, an amount of Rs. 1 lac was spent. After about 10/12 days of the marriage, the accused visited Harchandi's house and complained of giving lesser dowry. They put forth the demand of one scooter besides Rs. 50,000/- as cash amount. They threatened that if their demand was not fulfilled, they will desert Rekha. At that time, Rekha was at her parental house. She stayed there for about six months, during which, Harchandi's son visited the house of the accused to persuade them to bring Rekha to their house. They reiterated their demand and picked up a quarrel with him. He returned home. About six months later, Jagdish accused visited his in-laws' house and felt sorry for putting forward an unreasonable demand of dowry and requested to send Rekha along with him. By acceding his request, Rekha was sent with him. Thereafter, Rekha was not sent to her parental house. Her father visited the house of the accused to meet Rekha about two days prior to "Bhaiya Dooj". Rekha informed him that the accused have been harassing her on account of not meeting their afore- mentioned demand. On this, her father made a request to the accused to send her with him as she wanted to meet her mother and other members of the family. The accused promised to send her on "Bhaiya Dooj". Jagdish further promised that he would himself take her to her parental house. The accused did not live up to his promise. After 7/8 days of "Bhaiya Dooj", father of Rekha visited her in-laws' house and enquired as to why she was not sent home. On the aforesaid occasion, the accused voluntarily told that Rekha would not be sent unless their afore-referred demand is not fulfilled. So much so, he was asked to go out of their house. On 8.12.1994, Jagdish visited his in-laws' house at about 8.00 or 8:15 p.m., and told that Rekha was admitted in Government Hospital, Palwal and her condition was serious. Harchandi along with his son Ramesh, his wife Kishni, Parmal and Sumer visited the aforesaid hospital and found Rekha in burnt condition. The doctor advised them to take her to Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi as still she was alive. They removed her to the said hospital. From there, she was referred to Ram Manohar Lohiya Hospital, where she was got admitted. In the way, on inquiry, she disclosed to her parents that her mother-in-law and husband has burnt her by sprinkling kerosene oil on account of nonfulfilment of demand of dowry. The Sub Divisional Magistrate recorded the dying declaration Ex. PJ of Rekha. Ultimately, on 9.12.1994 at 11:52 A.M., she succumbed to the burn injuries. On the basis of Ex.PG, the statement of Harchandi, FIR was registered. The accused were arrested. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was laid in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palwal, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial of the accused.

(3.) WHEN examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, both the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them and pleaded false implication. They did not lead evidence in defence. After hearing the learned Public Prosecutor for the State, the learned defence counsel and examining the evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced both the accused under Section 498-A of IPC. Feeling aggrieved with their convition and sentence, they have preferred this appeal.