STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAMESH CHAND, SON OF TITA RAM, JUGNI DEVI, WIFE OF TITA RAM AND KULDIP, SON OF TITA RAM, ALL CASTE BY HARIZAN AND RESIDENTS OF CHAHARI, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment, dated 13.07.2004, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. in Sessions Case No. 105 -K/VII/03, whereby the respondents, who were charged with and tried for offence punishable under Sections 306, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, have been acquitted. Case of the prosecution, in a nut -shell, is that Sushma Devi was married to accused Ramesh Chand in the year 1996 according to Hindu customs and ceremonies. On 12.07.1998 at about 11:30 a.m., an information was received at Police Post, Nagrota Bagwan from Gurcharan Singh (PW -2), Up -Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Rajpura, stating that Sushma Devi, daughter of Roshan Lal, who was married to Ramesh Chand, has been murdered by giving poison and action be taken. The information was reduced into writing vide rapat No. 10. Thereafter, ASI Kishore Chand, HC, Beer Bhagwan Dass and other police officials went to the spot at village Chahari and recorded the statement of Roshan Lal, father of deceased Sushma Devi, under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(2.) According to PW -1, Shushma Devi was maintained properly for about one year of their marriage and after that there were differences developed between the accused and his daughter. She was not liked by her mother -in -law and father -in -law. According to him, his daughter had been complaining to him several times that her husband had been giving beatings to her. His daughter fell ill on 18.06.1998. She was admitted in Nagrota Bagwan hospital. She was not attended by her family members. He received a telephone of his daughter that she is alone in the hospital. Thereafter, he sent his wife to look after Sushma Devi in the hospital. She remained in the hospital for 15 days. On 12.07.1998, Garibu Ram came to his house and informed about the death of Sushma Devi. Thereafter, he came to the house of accused alongwith villagers and found his daughter dead. According to him, his daughter has consumed some poison due to the harassment meted out to her by the accused persons. On the basis of statement of PW -1, Roshan Lal, an F.I.R. was registered under Section 306, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The investigation was carried out and the challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) MR . Vivek Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that the learned trial Court has misread the evidence led by the prosecution. According to him, the prosecution has proved its case against the accused persons.