HARISH ALIAS DEVI PARSHAD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is instituted against judgment dated 10.06.2003 and order dated 11.06.2003, rendered by learned Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, in Sessions Case No. 25 of 21.12.1999, whereby appellants Harish alias Devi Parshad and Vidya Devi, who were charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC, were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for offence under Section 304-B IPC. They were also convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each, for offence under Section 498-A IPC. Co-accused Durga Parshad died during the pendency of trial. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that Madhu Bala daughter of PW.8 Lal Singh was married to accused Harish on 15.01.1996. Sufficient dowry was given at the time of the marriage. However, after about one year of the solemnisation of marriage, the accused raised new demand of dowry. They demanded a moped and refrigerator. The demand was also raised by them from Madhu Bala, about 3-4 months prior to her death. She brought this fact to the notice of members of her family. PW.7 Parmod, brother of Madhu Bala, and his father Lal Singh (PW.8) went to the accused a number of times in order to persuade them not to insist on the fulfillment of the dowry demand. PW.7 Parmod received information on 14.08.1999 at about 11.30 AM that Madhu Bala had met with an accident. He rushed to the house of the accused. He saw Madhu Bala lying dead on the first floor of the house in burnt condition. He informed his parents, who reached there. Thereafter, he left his parents at the spot and left for the police station. He met the police at Bawla Chowk, Tauru. He made statement Ex.PF before PW.9 SI Amar Nath. FIR Ex.PE was registered. The rough site plan Ex.PM was prepared by SI Amar Nath. The inquest report Ex.PB was prepared. The body was sent for post mortem examination. PW.1 Dr. Bhavnish Arora conducted the post mortem examination on the body of the deceased. According to his opinion, the death was on account of asphyxia and shock due to burns which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution examined a number of witnesses in support of its case. The appellants were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the case of the prosecution. According to them, they were falsely implicated. They examined three witnesses in support of their defence.