Back
2003 Supreme(P&H) 338
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
K.C. Gupta, J.
Vikram Singh - Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1827-SB of 2002.
Decided On : 24 February, 2003
For the Appellant :Mr. H.S. Hooda, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ravinder Hooda, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sudhir Nehra, AAG, Haryana.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that intentional harassment for dowry and instigation to commit suicide constitute offenses under Sections 498-A and 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Dowry Harassment - Indian Penal Code - Sections 306, 498A, 34 - The court found the appellants guilty and convicted them under Sections 306/34 and 498-A/34 Indian Penal Code. The court acquitted appellant Nos. 1 and 3 but upheld the conviction of appellant No. 2, Surender, for harassing the deceased on account of dowry and instigating her to commit suicide.
Fact of the Case:
Pushpa, the deceased, was harassed by the appellants for inadequate dowry. She was sent back to her parental house after being beaten and was later taken back to the matrimonial home, where she committed suicide. The prosecution alleged that the harassment led to her suicide.
Finding of the Court:
The court found appellant No. 2, Surender, guilty of harassing Pushpa on account of dowry and instigating her to commit suicide. Appellant Nos. 1 and 3 were acquitted due to lack of evidence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellants were guilty of harassing Pushpa for dowry and instigating her to commit suicide.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence proved that Surender harassed Pushpa for dowry and instigated her to commit suicide, leading to his conviction. The acquittal of appellant Nos. 1 and 3 was based on lack of evidence of their involvement in the harassment.
Final Decision: The appeal of appellant Nos. 1 and 3 was accepted, and they were acquitted. The appeal of appellant No. 2, Surender, was dismissed, upholding his conviction and sentencing under Sections 498-A and 306/34 Indian Penal Code.
K.C. Gupta, J. - This appeal has been directed by Vikram Singh, father-in- law, Surender, husband and Smt. Sahbo, mother-in-law of Pushpa (since deceased) against the judgment and order dated 19.10.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, whereby they were found guilty and convicted under Sections 306 and 498A read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 8 years and a fine of Rs. 8,000/- each under Section 306 Indian Penal Code; in default of payment of fine, the defaulter was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years; to undergo R.I. for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 2000/- each under Section 498-A/34 Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, the defaulter was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of six months. However, both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It was also ordered that out of the fine realised 80% would go to the father of the deceased, Pushpa.
2. Briefly stated, the facts are that Pushpa was the third daughter of PW-10 Dilbag Singh. She was married to appellant Surender in village Aasan in the year 1994 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. At that time, Dilbag Singh had given sufficient dowry but the appellants were not satisfied with the dowry given. They started harassing her. In order to make them happy, PW-10 Dilbag Singh used to give some money to his daughter Pushpa whenever she visited him but the demand of the appellants remained always on the increasing side. They used to beat her. Smt. Pushpa used to tell to her father about the atrocities committed upon her, whenever she visited him. After about two and half years of the marriage, Pushpa had given birth to a daughter, namely, Garima and at that time also, PW-10 Dilbag Singh had given sufficient gifts but the appellants were not satisfied.
3. About 3 months back, Vikram and Smt. Sahbo, appellants, sent their son, Surender to PW-4 Sombir, maternal uncle of Pushpa, with a demand of Rs. 80,000/- for purchase of tractor but PW-4 Sombir refused to oblige him and informed about it to Dilbag Singh, who also told him not to oblige Surender as he and his father would spend the amount on liquor.
4. It was further averred that after their demand was not fulfilled, they became more harsh towards Pushpa and started beating her. Pushpa, then came to Village Khudan and apprised of the cruelty of her in-laws towards her to PW-10 Dilbag Singh. She remained in her parental house for about three months and was taken back by Surender, appellant, only 10 days prior to the occurrence, after giving assurance that she would be treated nicely in the matrimonial house.
5. On 23.4.2002, PW-2 Prem wife of Dilbag Singh received a telephonic message at about 6/7 PM through PW-3 Krishan from Vikram, appellant, that Pushpa had ended her life by committing suicide by hanging.
6. Upon receipt of this information, PW-10 Dilbag Singh along with his wife, PW-2 Prem, brother-in-law Sombir PW-4 and others reached Village Aasan and found the dead body of Pushpa hanging in the room of first floor of their house. Broken pieces of her bangles and her chappals were also lying there.
7. Case bearing FIR, Ex. PH, was registered upon the statement, Ex. PG of PW-10 Dilbag Singh. PW-12 Ram Kishan, ASI, investigated the case. He got the hanging dead body of Pushpa photographed from PW-7 Raj Pal, Photographer. He prepared inquest report, Ex. PC. He took into possession the broken bangles in match-box, Ex. P7 and Chaplas Exs. P-5 and P-6 by making separate sealed parcels vide recovery memo Ex. PD. He prepared rough site plan, Ex. PK of the place of occurrence and sent the dead body for post mortem examination with police application, Ex. PA.
8. PW-1 Dr. Mahesh Parkash, Medical Officer, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Smt. Pushpa and gave his report, Ex. PB. He stated that the cause of death of Smt. Pushpa was due to asphyxia and congestion as a result of hanging, which was ante-mortem in nature and
