IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

213 CRM-A-2670-2019 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 12.09.2025 Anu ...Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present:- Mr. Ankur Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab *****

KIRTI SINGH, J. (Oral)

The instant application under Section 378(3) of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of leave to appeal for challenging the impugned judgment dated 05.08.2019, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kharar, in case FIR No.4 dated 23.01.2015 under sections 406 and 498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Naya Gaon, District SAS Nagar Mohali wherein, the accused persons (respondents herein) were acquitted from the aforementioned charges.

2. Shorn of details, the facts of the case are that the marriage of complainant was solemnised with accused-respondent No.2 on 17.06.2012. A huge amount was spent on the same by her family, and many valuables, including, gold jewellery and household articles, were given to the accused. However, after some time of marriage, the private respondents, i.e., the husband and in-laws of the complainant harassed her for bringing insufficient dowry and started pressuring her to bring more dowry, and when she expressed her helplessness, all the accused assaulted and beat the complainant, raising the demand of a motorcycle and cash. Despite having been warned by the police to treat the complainant properly, the complainant was subjected to harassment and assaulted by her husband. Upon these allegations, a complaint was moved by the applicant against her husband and in-laws. Challan was presented in the case and after conclusion of trial, learned Trial Court acquitted respondents No.2 to 4. Aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondents, the petitioner has filed the present appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned trial court had wrongly acquitted respondents No.2 to 4. It is submitted that the applicant had given the detailed account of the cruelty suffered by her at the hands of the private respondents, and also of the instances where she had been ousted from her matrimonial home by her husband and in-laws. The ordeals stated by her in the complaint were also reiterated by her on oath, and the same were also corroborated in her testimony. Yet the learned Trial Court overlooked the same and acquitted the respondents No.2 to 4 resulting in travesty of justice.

4. Learned State counsel submits that the trial court proceeded to acquit the respondents citing lack of evidence against them and passed the impugned order of acquittal.

5. After having heard the case and perused the record, it comes out that during the trial, besides the complainant, other witnesses were also duly examined. However, upon finding lack of specific allegations against the respondents No.2 to 4 and in absence of any corroborative evidence, they were acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 05.08.2019. It was alleged that the applicant was subjected to physical cruelty, but no medical evidence, though not sine qua non, was put forth. Further, no evidence in support of the contention regarding the dowry articles purportedly given in the marriage, including bills of purchase, were presented by the applicant. All these facts when seen in circumspection rendered the testimonies of the complainant witnesses as non reliable so as to be made the sole basis for conviction of the respondent in the absence of any corroborative evidence whatsoever.

6. Following the observations made by its Constitution Bench in M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra (1963) 2 SCR 405, the Supreme Court in Ghurey Lal v. State of UP (2008) 10 SCC 450 laid down the aforesaid principles :

"69. The following principles emerge from cases

1. The Appellate Court may review the evidence in appeals against acquittal under sections 378 and 386 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Its power of reviewing evidence