Back
2009 Supreme(HP) 1341
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
Before (Division Bench)
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, J.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J.
Cr. Appeal No. 217/1995 Date of decision: 31.12. 2009
State of H.P. Versus Harbans Lal and others
For the Appellant:Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General.
For the respondents:Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, Advocate.
The importance of credible and consistent evidence in cases involving allegations of harassment, dowry demands, and spousal abuse.
Headnote:
498-A and 306 Indian Penal Code - Acquittal - Summary of Acts and Sections: Sections 498-A and 306 Indian Penal Code - The court discussed the allegations of harassment, demand for dowry, and the suggestion for the deceased to live as the wife of all three sons. The court highlighted the lack of evidence supporting the prosecution's claims and emphasized the importance of spontaneous FIR and contradictory statements by witnesses.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased was allegedly subjected to harassment and demands for dowry by her in-laws. She was found dead in a water pit, leading to the filing of charges under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no evidence of recent harassment or physical abuse leading to the deceased's death. It also noted discrepancies in witness statements and lack of spontaneous FIR, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Issues: Allegations of harassment, demand for dowry, and suggestion for the deceased to live as the wife of all three sons.
Ratio Decidendi: The lack of evidence supporting the prosecution's claims, discrepancies in witness statements, and the importance of spontaneous FIR and consistent testimonies influenced the court's decision.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the judgment of acquittal.
Surjit Singh, J (Oral) State has appealed against the judgment dated 9.6.1994 of learned Sessions Court Hamirpur, whereby respondent Harbans Lal husband, Dhani Ram and Karam Chand brothers of the husband and Bohri Devi mother-in-law of deceased Urmila Devi, who were tried for offences under Sections 498-A and 306 Indian Penal Code, have been acquitted.
2. Case of the prosecution may be summed up thus. Deceased Urmila Devi daughter of PW1 Kirpa Ram was married to Harbans Lal respondent in the month of October 1984. For about four months, Urmila Devi was kept and treated well but thereafter, all the respondents started giving beatings to her. Respondent Bohri Devi, the mother-in-law of the deceased wanted that she live as wife of all her three sons, i.e., respondent Harbans Lal, with whom she was married and also his two brothers, i.e., respondent Dhani Ram and Karam Chand. Deceased objected to this immoral suggestion of Bohri Devi. Further, all the four respondents used to demand television set, Sofa-set and some large sized vessels meant for cooking rice known as Charoties. Once in the year 1986, Urmila was so severely beaten up that she left the respondents’ house and went to her parents’ place. Respondent Harbans Lal husband of Urmila Devi accompanied by his father Dialu Ram went to PW9 Basant Ram Pradhan of his Gram Panchayat and requested him to convene a meeting of the Panchayat and manage to get Urmila Devi (deceased) back to their place. Basant Ram accompanied respondent Harbans Lal and his father to the house of Kirpa Ram. Gopala Ram (PW2) and one Roshan Lal also accompanied them. There, Pradhan of the Panchayat, in which the village of Kirpa Ram falls, namely, Balbir Singh (PW8) and other members of the Panchayat were called. Urmila Devi made the allegation in the presence of both the Pradhans and the members of the Panchayat that she was beaten up because respondent Bohri Devi her mother-in-law wanted her to live as wife of all her three sons and also that all the respondents demanded television-set, sofa-set and Charoties. Panchayat intervened and on assurance by the respondents that deceased would not be harassed or beaten up, she was sent back to the matrimonial home. Thereafter, the deceased delivered a male child who had a tumor on his back. Respondent Harbans Lal took the deceased and his child to Jammu, where he was posted in the Indian Army those days, so that, the child could be treated at the Army Hospital. Deceased lived with Harbans Lal at Jammu for about two years. Three months prior to her death (date of death is 17.11.1990), Urmila Devi was brought back to the village by Harbans Lal her husband from Jammu. She visited her parents’ place and remained there for about a month. Then she returned to her in-laws’ place. Her husband respondent Harbans Lal was still there in the village.
3. On 17.11.1990, around 11.45 a.m., dead body of Urmila Devi was found in a Khaati (a deep pit dug of water store in which rain water is collected for drinking purposes). Police was immediately informed by Harbans Lal respondent. Police reached the spot. By that time Kirpa Ram (PW1), father of the deceased also reached. Inquest was conducted by PW18 Inspector Pritam Singh. Inquest report is Ext. PE. As per inquest report, there was a mark of injury on the right side of the neck. It is recorded that as per the preliminary investigation, it appeared to be a case of accidental fall into the Khaati leading to death by drowning.
4. Dead body was sent to the Hospital for postmortem examination. Doctor Puran Chand (PW17), who conducted the postmortem examination, did not notice any external or internal injury on the dead body. He gave the opinion that it was a case of death by drowning.
5. After inquest was conducted in the presence of Kirpa Ram the father of deceased, statement under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of said Kirpa Ram was recorded. In that statement, Kirpa Ram got recorded that deceased us
