Crl.A Nos.907/2001, 822/2001 & 796/2001 Page 1 of 52

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

Crl. A. No.907/2001

%

Judgment reserved on : 30^th May, 2012

Judgment pronounced on : 4^th July, 2012

Smt.Hardeep Kaur

Appellant

Through Mr.K.T.S. Tulsi, Senior Advocate with

Mr.Ravinder Singh and Mr.Faraz Khan,

Advocates.

Versus

The N.C.T of Delhi

…. Respondent

Through

Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State.

AND

+

Crl.A No.822/2001

Sh.Baljit Singh

Appellant

Through Mr.Jitender Sethi & Mr.Rajiv Bansal,

Advocates.

Versus

State

…. Respondent

Through

Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State.

AND

+

Crl.A No.796/2001

Arvinder Singh

Appellant

Through Mr.Siddharth Luthra, Senior Advocate

with Mr.Rajiv Gaur „Naseem‟ and

Mr.Arashdeep Singh, Advocates.

Versus

State of Delhi

…. Respondent

Through

Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State.

2012:DHC:3996-DB

Crl.A Nos.907/2001, 822/2001 & 796/2001 Page 2 of 52

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J.

*

1. The present appeals are filed by the appellants against the

judgment dated September 12, 2001 passed in FIR No.913 of 1997

registered at Police Station Paschim Vihar for the offences punishable

under Sections 302/498A/120B/406/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860

whereby the appellants have been held guilty and convicted for the

offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 120 of IPC

and for offence under Section 498A/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The appellants have also challenged the impugned order on

sentence by which the appellants have been directed to undergo life

imprisonment for the offences under Section 302/120B of IPC with fine

of `10,000/- each and in default to undergo further RI of three months

each, further sentenced them to RI of three years under Section

498A/34 of IPC and fine of `5,000/- each and in default to undergo

additional RI of two months each.

3. All the appellants have been convicted by the common judgment

and sentenced by a common order as mentioned above, therefore, all

the appeals are decided by a common judgment.

2012:DHC:3996-DB

Crl.A Nos.907/2001, 822/2001 & 796/2001 Page 3 of 52

4. The appellant Smt.Hardeep Kaur is mother-in-law of Davender

Kaur (deceased) who married with the appellant Baljit Singh (husband)

according to Sikh rites on November 12, 1997. The appellant Arvinder

Singh is the husband of sister of the appellant Baljit Singh.

5. The relevant facts of the case are that on 8^th November, 1997, the

PCR received a call about setting on fire a woman at B-1-127, Paschiv

Vihar. Accordingly, the said information was recorded vide DD No.9A

(Ex.PW6/A). The said DD was entrusted to SI Rattan Singh (PW11) who

along with Constable Raj Singh (PW5) reached at the spot of incident.

There he came to know that the injured already shifted to Safdarjung

Hospital by PCR van. Accordingly, PW11 ASI Rattan Singh reached at

the hospital. In the hospital, doctor declared Smt. Davender Kaur fit for

statement.

6. PW2 Davender Singh, SDM, Vasant Vihar arrived at the hospital

at 5.25 pm, who recorded the statement (Ex.PW2/B) of Smt. Davender

Kaur in question-answer form. In an answer to the questions, she

stated that, “her name is Davender Kaur and she was marred to Baljit

2012:DHC:3996-DB

Crl.A Nos.907/2001, 822/2001 & 796/2001 Page 4 of 52

burnt her on account of dowry”.

7. After the usual endorsement by the Area SDM, PW10 B.S. Jaglan,

the case was registered against the accused persons including the

appellants under Sections 498A/307 of IPC.

8. In the meanwhile, DD No.50B (Ex.PW4/D1) was