STATE OF H.P. Vs. KULDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after the leave to appeal has been granted under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in reference to judgment dated 30.12.2005 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District Kanga in Criminal Case No. 19-II/2002, thereby acquitting the respondent/accused for the offence under Section 498-A of IPC.

(2.) IN order to prove its case, prosecution has examined as many as 11 prosecution witnesses, whereas, through his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C, accused/ respondent denied the prosecution case.

(3.) FROM the record, it appears that complainant has not made any complaint to the villagers, locality or the police regarding torturing and beatings given to her by the accused. Even PW-2, has also not made any written complaint at any point of time regarding demand of dowry or harassment or creating such injury on her person. At one occasion, prosecution has examined PW-9 who stated that on 4.2.1993 PW-1 was medically examined during mid night around 11.55 p.m. In her opinion, probable duration of injuries referred to in MLC Ext PW-9 was within 10 days. Such alleged beating to the complaint was also not specific, more so the FIR was not brought on record. Record does not reveal that any specific demand of dowry was ever made till February, 2000 when both continued to live together for number of years, therefore, case under Section 498-A is not proved against the respondent/accused