PUNEET Vs. U.T., CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed by complainant-Puneet under for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 27.03.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Special Court, Chandigarh, vide which in case FIR No. 313 dated 17.06.2015 under Sections 304-B, 306, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station, Manimajra (Ex. P. 17), Chandigarh, the respondents, namely, Anoop Kataria (father-in-law), Mahender Kaur (mother-in-law), Chanchal Kataria (brother-in-law) and Kavita Kataria (sister-in-law) were acquitted of the charges framed against them under Sections 120-B, 304 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC and in alternate under Section 306 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC.

(2.) As per complainant-Puneet (PW1) (brother of deceased sister 'N '), marriage of his sister 'N ' was performed with Balwinder Kataria on 29.4.2015. She was being given beatings right after a few days of her marriage. Her husband-Balwinder asked to bring 3 lacs, as he had to go to Italy and mother-in-law and father-in-law used to taunt that they had offers for the marriage of their son from well to do families, but by marrying her, their lives had been ruined. Even Chanchal-respondent No. 4 demanded a car and Kavita, respondent No. 5 asked for a gold set. Regarding this 'N ' told them many a time and when the complainant (PW. 1) went to visit her, she used to weep, but 'N ' was told to settle in her matrimonial home. Accordingly FIR (Ex. P. 17) was registered under Section 304-B, 120-B IPC, 304-B IPC.

(3.) After investigation, charges were framed against the accused-respondents under Sections 120-B IPC, 304-B IPC read with Section 120-B IPC and in alternate under Section 306 read with Section 120-B IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.