Back
2011(2) RCR(Cri) 508
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
A.N.JINDAL, J.
Darshan Singh and others -Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab -Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.1222-SB of 2000(O&M)
Decided on: September 29, 2010
Dowry Harassment - Indian Penal Code 1860 Section 304-B - Summary of Acts and Sections: IPC 1860 Section 304-B - The court discussed the evidence of dowry harassment and the demand for TV and fridge, the dying declaration of the deceased, and the circumstances leading to her death. The court also considered the lack of evidence supporting the accused's defense and the failure to explain the deceased's death.
Fact of the Case:
Malkiat Kaur, a newlywed, died by suicide due to alleged dowry harassment and demand for TV and fridge. The accused were convicted under IPC 1860 Section 304-B.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the deceased was harassed for dowry, as evidenced by her dying declaration and the consistent testimony of witnesses. The accused failed to provide a convincing defense and explain the circumstances leading to the deceased's death.
Issues: The key issue was whether the deceased was subjected to dowry harassment and whether the accused were responsible for her death.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence of dowry harassment, the dying declaration of the deceased, and the lack of a convincing defense supported the conviction under IPC 1860 Section 304-B.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the accused's sentence was upheld.
A.N.JINDAL, J.-
1. Malkiat Kaur, aged about 24 years, who had just entered the threshold matrimonial era was allegedly forced to commit suicide within seven months of her marriage by consuming `organo phosphorus' a group of insecticides. Consequently, the accused – appellants (herein referred as `the accused') were tried, convicted and ultimately sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eight years, each, under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code 1860.
2. Saun Singh, a resident of village Moosa had three daughters and a son. He had married his second daughter Malkiat Kaur to the accused Darshan Singh, seven months prior to the occurrence. Accused Karnail Singh is the father-in-law and accused Bhuro Kaur alias Amar Kaur is the mother-in-law of Malkiat Kaur. A sum of Rs.60,000/-in cash, besides other golden ornaments weighing about 10 Tolas, clothes and utensils were given to the accused at the time of marriage by the complainant and he spent about Rs.1,60,000/-on the marriage. However, the accused were not satisfied with the articles of dowry. After about six months of the marriage when the deceased came to her parental house, she disclosed that all the three accused were harassing and maltreating her, and compelling her to bring a TV and fridge from her parents, and she was being treated in such a manner almost daily. However, 23/24 days after she stayed at her parental house, the accused Darshan Singh again took her back. On 23.10.1992 when the complainant along with his brother Jarnail Singh had gone to village Sheikhpura to enquire about the well-being of their daughter, on reaching there at 11.00 AM, they witnessed that Malkiat Kaur was lying in the courtyard and was crying. On being asked, she told that she had been administered some poisonous substance on her failure to bring TV and fridge. On this, the complainant and his brother rushed her to Civil Hospital, Talwandi Sabo, but she expired while she was just at the gate of the Civil Hospital.
3. The occurrence is stated to have taken place on 23.10.1992 at 11.00 AM. The case was registered against the accused on the same day at 2.30 PM on the basis of the statement of Saun Singh recorded at 2.00 PM, vide First Information Report (Ex.PA/2). Sub-Inspector Amarjit Singh reached the spot, conducted the inquest report and got an autopsy (Ex.PH) performed by Dr.Ramesh Kumar (PW7) and Dr.S.K.Gupta on the dead body of Malkiat Kaur. On receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner (Ex.PJ), the doctor opined vide report Ex.PK that cause of death in this case was `organo phosphorus poisoning. The Investigating Officer also recorded the statements of the witnesses and on completion of the investigation, challan against the accused was presented.
4. All the accused were charged for the offence under Section 304-B IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined Saun Singh – complainant (PW1), his brother Jarnail Singh (PW4), both being the members of the family knowing fully about the affairs going on within the four-walls of the house, have deposed about the fact that Malkiat Kaur was married 6/7 months prior to the incident and sufficient articles of dowry and a cash of Rs.60,000/-were given to the accused. Malkiat Kaur had disclosed that all the accused were harassing her for bringing TV and fridge and on 23.10.1992, when they had visited the house of the accused at about 11.00 AM, then Malkiat Singh had informed them that she had been administered poisonous substance on account of the fact that she could not satisfy their demand of TV and fridge.
6. HC Gurjant Singh (PW2), ASI Mohinder Singh (PW3) and Sub-Inspector Amarjit Singh (PW5) have proved the investigation including the recovery of the dowry articles (Ex.P1 to P13), golden ornaments and wrist watch, etc., vide recovery memo Ex.PC. Constable Karnail Singh (PW6), a formal witness, had deposed on an affidavit (Ex.PG). Dr.Ramesh Kumar
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
