BIJENDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 22.07.2015 and order dated 24.07.2015, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, in Sessions Case No. 96 dated 13.08.2014, whereby appellant Bijender, who along with his co-accused Santro was charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 302 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, was convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000.00 under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, he was sentenced to further undergo sentence for six months. His co-accused Santro was acquitted of the charges.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that complainant Kanak Singh (PW.5) had made statement on 04.06.2014 to the effect that his daughter Reena was married to Bijender on 18.03.2008 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. He had given sufficient dowry. However, inlaws of his daughter treated her with cruelty. She was beaten by them about three years back. The matter was reported to the police. However, it was resolved. The in-laws of his daughter raised demand of cash and a motor cycle. He gave Rs. 15,000.00. He had also given Rs. 1,00,000.00 for construction of the house. However, the house was not constructed. Her husband Bijender, mother-in-law Santro and jeth Vikram used to beat her. She narrated the incident to him, his wife and her brother. His daughter made a telephone call to her mother three-four days prior to the occurrence. She informed her mother that her husband Bijender, mother-in-law Santro and jeth Vikram were again harassing her and demanding more dowry. He received information about the death of his daughter on 04.06.2014 at about 9.15 AM. He along with his other family members reached village Uplana. He found the dead body of his daughter lying on a cot. He noticed blue spots on her neck. It is in these circumstances that the FIR was registered. Body was sent for post-mortem examination. Dr. Mahinder Singh (PW.7) along with Dr. Munish Kumar conducted the post-mortem examination on the body of Reena vide post-mortem report Ex.P14. The investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused were also recorded under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C. According to them, they were falsely implicated. Appellant Bijender took the defence that his wife committed suicide by hanging, because she was not satisfied with his job and qualification. He further pleaded that after leaving job from the hospital, his wife was not feeling comfortable. The appellant examined one witness in his defence.