STATE OF H P Vs. JAGROOP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this petition, the judgment of acquittal recorded by Sessions Judge, Kangra, in Sessions Case No. 11/91, dated 26-3-1992, is sought to be assailed by the State. The accused were tried for offences under Sections 498-A/304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for having subjected deceased Krishna Devi to cruelty in order to meet their unlawful demand for dowry and the death having taken place within seven years of her marriage with accused Jagroop Singh in furtherance of their common intention. The prosecution case runs as follows : The accused are husband (Jagroop Singh), father (Balbir Singh), mother (Satya Devi) and sister Bimla Devi. The deceased was married to accused Jagroop Singh in the year 1982. On 6-7-1988, she consumed some poison at the house while the accused were working in the fields nearby. This fact was noticed by the younger son of accused Balbir Singh, who had come to the house to take water. He found the deceased lying on the bed and immediately thereafter called other members of the family who rushed to the place. The deceased was shifted to the hospital at Dada Siba immediately in an ambulance arranged by the family. It happened at 7.05 p.m. and stomach wash of the deceased was undertaken with plain water and the contents thereof were preserved. Thereafter, the deceased was referred to District Hospital, Dharamshala, for expert treatment after giving her first-aid at Dada-Siba hospital. However, she expired on 7-7-1988.

(2.) Shri Harbans Singh, brother of the deceased, informed the police at Police Station, Dehra, alleging that soonafter the marriage, the accused used to harass the deceased on account of less dowry articles. He also stated that the accused used to demand huge money and the deceased was being subjected to cruelty in case the amount was not given. Accordingly, a case under Section 304-B read with Sections 34 and 498-B of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. The police started investigation. It recorded the statements of various witnesses. At the instance of the accused, a small 'shishi', containing the alleged poison, was also taken into possession. The body was subjected to post-mortem examination. Viscera was sent for chemical analysis. The handwriting of the accused was sent for comparison to Assistant Government Examiner, Questioned Documents, Shimla. Then, on completion of the investigation, the accused were challaned before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, who committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions Judge, Kangra. The accused were charged for the aforesaid offences. All of them pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The trial commenced but ended in the aforesaid acquittal of the accused. After examining the evidence of the witnesses recorded in this case, the trial Judge found that the prosecution case against the accused remained completely unsubstantiated. It also found that the relation witnesses of the complainant had not only made improvements in their versions in the Court but could not be depended upon for having taken U-turn in their depositions against the accused although the evidence pointed out that the relations between the couple were not strained before the death of the deceased. Further, the demand for dowry was not supported by any evidence at the stage when the marriage had taken place nor at the various stages following it. The trial Court found substance in the explanation of the accused, their conduct and recorded also that the relations between the deceased and the accused were cordial and there had not been any demand for dowry neither at the time of marriage nor subsequent thereto. The deceased was living happily with accused Jagroop Singh and his family and it could be that she had taken the poison just by mistake since this kind of insecticide is normally kept by an agriculturist family to which the accused belonged, as there was no doubt about it. Further, the demand for Rs. 30,000.00 was not by way of dowry but was by way of loan payable soon after. This demand was made since accused Jagroop Singh had to spend money on the marriage of his sister that was arranged all of a sudden and to this marriage, the brother of the deceased was also cordially invited. In these circumstances, the trial Court concluded in favour of the accused. However, the State has sought to challenge the findings recorded in this case by seeking leave from this Court. The appeal is barred by time by 23 days, therefore, notice of application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act (Cr. M. P. (M) No. 1028 of 1992) was issued on 22-10-1992. In pursuance of this notice, Ms. Bandana Lakhanpal, vice Shri K. D. Sood, has appeared in defence of the accused. I propose to deal with the case on merits to examine whether there is substance in the contention of Shri M. S. Guleria, learned Deputy Advocate-General for the State, that the findings recorded by the trial Court ought to be set aside since they are not supported by evidence which has not been correctly appreciated by the trial Judge.

(3.) There is no doubt that the deceased was married to accused Jagroop Singh in the year 1982. Out of the wedlock, the couple had two female children. It is also an admitted position that on 6-7-1988, the deceased took some poison as a result of which she was lying in the bed where she was noticed by the younger son of accused Balbir Singh, who had come to the house to take water. The other family members rushed to the house from the fields nearby when informed about this state of the deceased. It has also been established by evidence that the family members immediately arranged for an ambulance and shifted the deceased to the hospital at Dada-Siba at 7.05 p.m. where her stomach was washed and first-aid was given to her. It has been recorded by Dr. S. N. Sharma (P.W. 3) that the deceased was brought to the hospital by accused Jagroop Singh in ambulance. He has also recorded that he was told by the relations that the deceased had been given water to drink and deshi ghee to eat.