BALJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this common judgment I am disposing of Cr. A.No. 6-SB of 1994 and Cr. Revision No. 157 of 1994, as they arise out of the same judgment dated/order dated 17.12.1993 of the Sessions Judge, Ludhiana whereby he convicted appellants Baljit Singh and Veerpal Kaur under Section Section 498-A I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000, in default, to further undergo RI for four months. They were also convicted under Section 304-B I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that Sher Singh father of deceased Paljit Kaur was married to appellant Baljit Singh about 7 months before the occurrence. Appellant Veerpal Kaur is the sister of appellant Baljit Singh. Dalip Singh was the go between. As per F.I.R. Ex. PE, sufficient money was spent on the marriage. Appellants were not satisfied and they started taunting deceased Paljit Kaur that she had not brought motor-cycle Hero Honda in dowry. Paljit Kaur informed her father Sher Singh who informed Dalip Singh about the harassment. Deceased Paljit Kaur kept complaining about the harassment. Sher Singh along with his son Gurmukh Singh and Dalip Singh then again went and asked the appellants not to harass his daughter. Appellants at that time stated that the matter can be settled if a motor-cycle Hero Honda is given to them. This happened about two months before the death of Paljit Kaur which was on 21.9.1991. 3/4 days prior to the occurrence, Sher Singh and his son Gurmukh Singh had gone to the house of the appellants and both the appellants had again insisted for a motor-cycle Hero Honda. Appellant Baljit Singh had also threatened that he would otherwise go in for a second marriage. At this Paljit Kaur became very sad. Sher Singh then came to know that his daughter had consumed some poisonous substance and she had died. Gurmukh Singh and Sher Singh then went to the house of the appellants. After leaving Gurmukh Singh at the place of occurrence, Sher Singh was going to Police Station, Sardulgarh, where he met the policy party at Bus Stand, Sardulgarh and recorded the F.I.R.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants has stated that Sher Singh PW-2 in his testimony before the Court has not stated that any demand of dowry was made at the time of marriage. It has come in his statement that a scooter was given to the appellants at the time of the marriage. Since a scooter had been given, the demand for a motor-cycle Hero Honda is not a demand which can be accepted. If the appellants wanted a motor-cycle, they would have at the very outset told Sher Singh PW-2, that instead of a scooter, a motor-cycle be given as the difference of money is hardly Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 4,000/-. There are contradictions in the statements of Sher Singh PW-2 and Dalip Singh PW-3. Sher Singh PW-2 has stated that the went to visit his daughter two months prior to the occurrence and Dalip Singh PW-3 has stated that he went to see Paljit Kaur, five months before the occurrence. In fact, Paljit Kaur was pregnant and she ate eight Rai Chhibers, which grow wild in the fields, Rai Chhibers being tasty and pungent to eat.