The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.

JUDGEMENT

RAJESH SEKHRI, J.

1. This judgment shall give quietus to the ordeal of respondents which unfortunately has lasted for about twenty years and the present appeal hanging fire for the last about sixteen years.

2. This appeal has been directed against judgment dated 26.04.2008, passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (for short, trial court) in case titled 'State vs. Vivek Gupta and others', vide which, respondents came to be acquitted.

Factual Matrix

3. As the prosecution story would unfurl, on 12.03.2004, Police Post, Sainik Colony, Jammu received a telephonic message at 15:30 hours from PW-Mangat Ram on behalf of CEO, Udhampur that Ms. Vandana Gupta W/o Vivek Gupta had passed away at her residence situate at 208 Sector-A, Sainik Colony, Jammu and her dead body had been shifted by her in-laws to their residence at Jeewan Nagar. An entry was made in the Roznamcha and inquest proceedings under section 174 Cr.P.C came to be initiated. The dead body was sent for postmortem and on receipt of post mortem and inquest proceedings, FIR No. 21 of 2004 under sections 302/498/34 RPC came to be registered on 13.03.2004. The investigating agency concluded that husband of the deceased, respondent-Vivek Gupta having strangulated his wife to death was liable for murder, whereas his parents, respondents No. 2 and 3 were involved in the dowry harassment caused to the deceased. As a result, the investigation culminated into the final report, in terms of Section 173 Cr.P.C., for commission of offences under sections 302/498-A RPC against respondent No. 1 and 498-A against rest of the respondents. Respondents came to be charged, by the trial Court, for the aforesaid offences whereby they pleaded innocence and claimed trial, prompting the trial court to ask for the prosecution evidence.

Prosecution Evidence

4. A brief resume of the prosecution evidence is as below:

5. PW-1-Jia Lal is father of the deceased. He has deposed that his daughter was married to respondent No. 1 on 15.02.2002 and he had given sufficient dowry and a car to the accused as per his capacity. Though deceased did not tell him anything, but he found his daughter in distress and frail within 5 to 6 months of her marriage. On 13.05.2003, deceased visited her elder sister Ms. Ranjana Gupta and informed her that her in-laws were inimical towards her for bringing insufficient dowry. This fact was not revealed to him by the deceased. Deceased came to her parental home in June and demanded Rs. 15,000/- for a new motor cycle, which he immediately provided. The witness goes on to state that when deceased and her husband-respondent No. 1 shifted to their new house at Sainik Colony, he visited their house on 12.08.2003, brought the couple to his house and gave Rs. 10,000/- to his daughter which was demanded by her. It is further alleged by the witness that respondent No. 1/accused also demanded a Santro Car and share in a plot situate at Bantalab. He received telephonic message from accused/respondent Puran Chand (now dead) on 12.03.2004 who asked him to visit Jeewan Nagar as some dispute had arisen between the deceased and her husband. Meanwhile, he received a call from some lady that his daughter had been murdered. He rang one Nutan Gupta, PA to Education Minister, not to allow last rites of his daughter, till he reached Jammu. On the asking of the said PA, a message was faxed to SSP and SHO, Satwari. On his way to Jammu, he received another telephonic message that his daughter was hospitalized in unconscious condition. When deceased could not traced in SMGS Hospital, he visited Police Station, where he came to know that his daughter had been murdered in Sainik Colony and her dead body had been shifted to Jeewan Nagar. He had seen injury marks on the forehead, right shoulder and back side of the neck of the deceased and he also noticed marks of rope. A Board of Doctors came to be constituted by the Medical Superintendent on the telephonic instructions of the Education Minist