2004 Supreme(P&H) 1047
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Jasbir Singh, J.
Dalip Kumar
Versus
State Of Haryana
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3175 of 1990,
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 14, 2004
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the essential ingredients for a dowry death under Sec.304b IPC were not satisfied, the appellant was found guilty of abetting the suicide of his wife under Sec.306 IPC based on his unreasonable and cruel conduct.
Headnote:
Cruelty - Dowry Death - Sec.304b IPC - Sec.306 IPC - [Sec.304b IPC, Sec.306 IPC] - The court analyzed the evidence and found that the essential ingredients to constitute an offence under Sec.304b IPC were not satisfied. However, the appellant was found guilty and convicted for commission of an offence under Sec.306 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for a period of four years.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for an offence under Sec.304b IPC for the death of his wife, who committed suicide by consuming poison. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for dowry by the appellant and his family members.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the essential ingredients to constitute an offence under Sec.304b IPC were not satisfied, as there was no evidence of cruelty or harassment soon before the death of the deceased in connection with the demand of dowry. However, the court found the appellant guilty and convicted him for an offence under Sec.306 IPC, as his conduct had forced his wife to commit suicide.
Issues: The issues revolved around the allegations of cruelty and harassment for dowry, the demand for money to purchase a tempo, and the circumstances leading to the deceased's suicide.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence did not establish the essential ingredients for a dowry death under Sec.304b IPC, but it found the appellant guilty of abetting the suicide of his wife under Sec.306 IPC based on his unreasonable and cruel conduct.
Final Decision: The conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant for commission of an offence under Sec.304b IPC were set aside, and he was found guilty and convicted for an offence under Sec.306 IPC, sentenced to undergo RI for a period of four years.
Jasbir Singh, J.
1. Appellant along with his father Kirpal Chand, mother Bhagwani Bai and Ram Sarup were put to face trial for commission of offences under Sections 498a and 304b/34 IPC. All the three persons named above, were acquitted, however, trial Court found appellant guilty for commission of an offence under Sec.304b IPC. Accordingly, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for a period of seven years. Hence, this appeal.
2. Fir in this case was recorded at the instance of Lal Chand, father of the deceased. As per prosecution story, marriage of Kanta Rani Madhu Bala was solemnised with appellant/accused on 21.2.1988. Thereafter, she started living with her inlaws. It is further case of the prosecution that at the time of marriage, sufficient dowry was given to the appellant and his family members. They, being greedy persons, used to demand more dowry items, again and again. He asked for a tempo/money to purchase the same from the complainant, which the complainant, due to his meagre financial resources, failed to pay to the appellant. Due to this reason, all family members had been maltreating his daughter. She had written letters to the complainant that her inlaws were very greedy people and they were demanding money from her for the purchase of tempo.
3. In the month of June, 1989, appellant alongwith his wife Kanta Rani had gone to village Nehlas to attend marriage of a relatives daughter. Even at that time, appellant demanded from the complainant money to purchase a four wheeler, failing which it was told that the complainant may keep his daughter in his house. On refusal, appellant left his wife and she was taken to her parents house at Ludhiana, where she lived for a month. She was taken back by the appellant/accused when he received a message of the complainant that if his daughter is not taken immediately, he will be compelled to initiate legal proceedings against appellant and his family members. Even thereafter, attitude of inlaws family did not change. They continued to harass the deceased and demand money for purchase of a four wheeler.
4. Fed up with their attitude and repeated demands, Kanta Rani had committed suicide by consuming poison on 6.9.1989. On getting information, parents reached Panipat, where, they came to know that their daughter had died on 7.9.1989. On the basis of statement made by Lal Chand, father of the deceased, FIR was recorded. Postmortem of the dead body was conducted and viscera was sent for chemical examination. In report received, viscera was found to have contained poison i. e. aluminium phosphate. Cause of death ultimately was opined as poisoning.
5. Investigation was completed as per law and on completion of investigation, final report was put up before competent Court. Chargesheet was framed against the appellant and others for commission of offences punishable under Sections 498a and 304b IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution then produced 8 witnesses to support its case and also brought on record documentary evidence. On completion of prosecution evidence, statement of the appellant and other accused was recorded under Sec.313 Cr. P. C. , wherein they admitted marriage of the deceased with the appellant, however, they denied all other accusations appearing against them in prosecution evidence. They took up a stand that they were innocent. No dowry including four wheeler was ever demanded at the time, before or after the marriage. They further stated that deceased was never harassed and mal treated, she was of sentimental nature and used to lose temper on trifle matters, that in those days in connection with marriage of a relative of the appellant, clothes were bought for the deceased, she was not satisfied with the quality and quantity of clothes, she was frustrated and appears to have committed suicide due to that reason. It was further stated that other family members had no concern with the marriedlife of the deceased and the app