STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. GOPAL KAUSHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh under Section 378 of the Cr. P.C. against the judgment of the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rohru, District Shimla, H. P., dated 31.3.2005, vide which he acquitted the respondents of the charge framed against them under Section 498A read with Section 34 I.P.C.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that on 19.10.2003, a report was lodged with the Police at Police Station, Rohru by the complainant PW -1 Smt. Renu that her marriage was performed with respondent No.1 Shri Gopal Kaushal in the month of July, 1998. The other respondents are the parents of the said Gopal Kaushal, her husband. It was alleged that in the marriage the dowry was given by her father according to his capacity. Two daughters were born from this wedlock who were aged about 4 years and 2 1/2 years. It was further alleged that after some time her husband Gopal Kaushal and his parents started demanding money from her parents to pay of their loans. She alleged that on their asking they had given money several times, which was brought from her father. It was further alleged that they are maltreating her and the respondents had turned her out after giving beatings and she has been compelled to live in her parents house. It was further alleged that on 8.10.2003, the respondents gave beatings to her and turned her out from the house and gave threatening not to come back until or unless she brings Rupees 3 lacs and a vehicle from her parents. It is further alleged that the respondents had thrown her from her house and she took shelter in her parents house and on this a case was registered under Section 498A IPC. After investigation, the challan was filed before the learned trial Court, who tried the respondents, as detailed above, leading to his acquittal.

(3.) ON appraisal of the report lodged by the complainant with the police, it is clear that the complainant has made general allegations in regard to the demand made by the respondents and she alleged that she gave money to them after bringing it from her father. The last demand pertains to the demand of a sum of Rs.3 lacs made on 8.10.2003. It is clear that apart from the demand of cash, there was no demand of specific dowry or dowry articles. In regard to the amounts paid by the complainant to the respondents, which she brought from her father, no date, month or year has been stated by the complainant and her brother who also paid money several times to the respondents, as has come in the statement of the complainant.