STATE OF H.P. Vs. NARENDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Himachal Pradesh aggrieved by the judgment dated 31.10.2011 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) Kangra at Dharamshala in RBT S.C. No. 52-P/VII/10 has come up in appeal to this Court on the grounds inter alia that the same being based upon hypothesis, conjectures and surmises is not legally sustainable. The prosecution evidence has not been appreciated in its right perspective and as a result thereof wrong conclusions drawn. The cogent and reliable evidence as has come on record by way of testimony of PW-1 Anu Kumari, PW-2 Pawan Kumar, PW-3 Manohar Lal, PW-6 Kalpana Devi, PW-11 Prem Lata and PW-12 Ashwani Kumar has been ignored without assigning any reason. The evidence as has come on record by way of official witnesses, including PW-10 Dr. Atul Gupta and PW-13 SI SHO PS Shahpur and the Investigating Officer Raj Kumar has also not been considered to the reasons best known to the learned trial Judge. The evidence qua the demand of dowry by the accused from the deceased has been ignored for want of any complaint qua the same by the complainant ignoring the fact that in such like cases, the parents avoid to indulge in litigation and rather to adopt the conciliatory procedure to settle the dispute. The factum of the deceased was married with the accused in January, 2007 and she committed suicide on 14.9.2009 well within 7 years of her marriage with the accused has not been taken into consideration. In view of the evidence qua cruel and mal-treatment meted out to the deceased having come on record by way of testimony of the mother, sister and other relatives of the deceased prove the guilt of the accused as it is the near relations who alone can say something in such like cases. The presumption that it is the accused who has abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased can be legally drawn in such like cases and it was for the accused to have otherwise proved his innocence. He, allegedly failed to discharge the onus on him, therefore, he has been sought to be convicted and sentenced for the commission of the offence punishable under Section 498 A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Deceased Pooja Devi was married with accused in January, 2007 since her mother Smt. Veena Devi was widow, therefore, the accused agreed not to demand any dowry. Therefore, in the marriage, no dowry was either demanded by the accused or given. Pooja, allegedly committed suicide by pouring kerosene oil on her person on 13.9.2009 at 8:30 PM. Information to this effect was received from HHC Ajit Singh posted at that time in Medical College Tanda in Police Station Shahpur that Pooja was admitted with burn injuries on her person and she has expired. The information so received was entered in Daily Diary, copy whereof is Ext. PW-13/A by PW-13, the then Insp. SHO, PS Shahpur. Subsequently, he accompanied by other police officials left for Medical College, Tanda. He prepared inquest papers Ext. PW-10/B. He also moved an application Ext. PW-10/A to Sr. Medical Officer for conducting post mortem of the deceased. The post mortem was conducted and the report Ext. PW-10/C collected. The dead body was handed over to the relatives of the deceased. He, thereafter recorded the statement Ext. PW-13/B of Veena Devi, the complainant under Section 154 Cr.P.C., on the basis whereof, FIR Ext. PW-8/C was recorded. He got the dead body photographed vide photographs Ext. PW-13/D to Ext. PW-13/K. The spot map Ext. PW-13/L was also prepared. He had taken into possession the stove (Ext. P-5), match box (Ext. P-6), 14 match sticks (Ext. P-7) from kitchen vide memo Ext. PW-13/L. The kerosene oil was found spreaded on the floor of the kitchen. He had taken in possession the plastic canny (Ext. P-8) vide memo Ext. PW-3/A. The burnt blankets (Ext. P-1 to Ext. P-4) were also taken into possession from the courtyard along with broken pieces of bangles Ext. PW-3/B. The statements Ext. PW-13/N of PW-3 Manohar Lal, Ext. PW-13/O of PW-2 Pawan Kumar and Ext. PW-13/P of PW-6 Kalpana Kumari were recorded as per their version. The case property was handed over by him to the MHC Anjan Paul (PW-8). On receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner Ext. PA and on completion of the investigation, he prepared the challan and presented the same in the Court.

(3.) Learned trial Judge on going through the challan and documents annexed therewith has concluded that a prima facie case under Section 498-A and 306 IPC is made out against the accused. Charge against him was, therefore, framed accordingly. He, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge.