STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. KAUR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal is filed against the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Court No.1 Kangra at Dharamshala in Sessions case No. 1 -N of 2006 decided on dated 28.3.2008. BRIEF FACTS OF THE PROSECUTION CASE:

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case as alleged by prosecution are that deceased Veena @ Sanju Devi was married with coaccused Kulwant about 10 -12 years back. It is alleged by prosecution that co -accused Kaur Singh is father -in -law of deceased, co -accused Krishna Devi is mother -in -law of deceased, co -accused Parvesh Lata is sister -in -law and Ravindr is brother -in -law of deceased. It is alleged by prosecution that accused persons have committed cruelty with deceased Veena Devi for bringing insufficient dowry. It is alleged by prosecution that all accused persons used to call the deceased as 'Kanjar' (Person leading illicit life). It is further alleged by prosecution that deceased had narrated the incident of harassment to her father and her step mother and also narrated the incident of cruelty to Pardhan and ward member. It is alleged by prosecution that milk was not provided to the children of deceased Veena Devi and she has complained to her father two months prior to her death and thereafter on advice of Panchayat Pardhan complainant Chanda Singh had provided cow to deceased in order to arrange milk for her children. It is also alleged by prosecution that accused persons have cremated deceased Veena Devi without informing her parents and destroyed the evidence. It is alleged by prosecution that FIR Ext.PW1/A was recorded in police station Nurpur and after registration of FIR statements of prosecution witnesses were recorded. It is also alleged by prosecution that site plan Ext.PW14/A was prepared where deceased was cremated and thereafter ash and bones at the spot were collected and sealed in separate piece of cloth. It is alleged by prosecution that deceased had committed suicide by way of consuming poison due to cruelty committed upon the deceased in her matrimonial house. It is alleged by prosecution that post mortem of deceased was not allowed to be conducted. It is also alleged by prosecution that ash and bones of deceased were collected from cremation site on dated 30.7.2004 after four days of cremation of dead body of deceased and sent to FSL Junga for chemical analysis through C. Dhani Ram who deposited the same in FSL Junga and chemical analyst report Ext.PA was sought.

(3.) CHARGE was framed against the accused persons by learned Additional Sessions Judge Court No.1 Kangra at Dharamshala on dated 21.6.2006 under Sections 498 -A read with Section 34 IPC, under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC and under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC. Accused person did not plead guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined the following witnesses in support of its case: -