- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1st September, 2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 238-SB of 2002 alongwith another case. By the impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the accused-Appellant and affirmed the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court Under Section 304B of Indian Penal Code ('Indian Penal Code' for short).
(2.) The case of the prosecution as noticed by the Trial Court is as follows: Raj Rani, youngest sister of complainant Ganpat Rai was married with accused Rajinder Kumar on 10th May, 1996 as per Hindu rites. At the time of marriage, the complainant had given handsome dowry and spent a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/-. When Raj Rani went to her in-laws second time, her husband-Rajinder, mother-in-law Darshna Devi, sisters-in-law Murti and Chirya and brother-in-law Binder started taunting and harassing her. On getting information, complainant Ganpat Rai alongwith his brothers Ghansham and Hari Chand came to village Dharsul and advised the accused not to harass Raj Rani. On this, accused persons stated that they will behave in this very manner and if they want to take away Raj Rani, they should get divorce. After that also, they continued to harass Raj Rani in the same manner. Again complainant Ganpat Rai along with Balak Ram went to the in-laws of Raj Rani and on 21st October, 1996 on the festival of Dushera Raj Rani was brought to complainant's house. At that time, accused-Rajinder and his family members asked Raj Rani that she should bring Rs. 20,000/- while coming back, otherwise it will not be good. On 28th October, 1996 Chanan Ram uncle of Rajinder and Binder came to village Chatha Nanhera at the house of the complainant along with customary gifts on the festival of Karwa Chauth. He stayed there for two days. On 30th October, 1996 i.e. one day before the occurrence, Raj Rani was brought back to her matrimonial house at Dharsul. Hari Chand brother of the complainant and Gurmel Singh also came along with her. Raj Rani told Hari Chand that her husband and in-laws had demanded Rs. 20,000/- and since the same has not been paid, they (accused) will kill her once Hari Chand and Gurmel Singh leave the place On this Hari Chand assured her that they will come back after 2/3 days and pay the money and returned to the village of the complainant alongwith Gurmel Singh. On 31st October, 1996 at about 6.00 AM, Tek Chand son of Krishan, resident of village Kulan came to the house of the complainant and told that Raj Rani has been murdered on the night intervening 30/31st October, 1996 by Rajinder, Binder her mother-in-law Darshna and sisters-in-law Murti and Chirya an account of bringing less dowry. On this information, complainant, his brother Hari Chand and Sukhpal Bansal reached village Dharsul Kalan and saw the dead body of Raj Rani, was lying on a cot in Chubara. On the statement of complainant Ganpat Rai FIR (Ex. PA/1 was registered and investigation was started by Chander Singh, Sub Inspector. Dr. P.L. Verma (PW-6) conducted the post mortem. After receiving report of the Chemical Examiner the cause of death was shown to be poisoning due to consumption of aluminium phosphide. The Appellant was charge-sheeted alongwith his mother and sisters for the offence Under Section 498A and 304B Indian Penal Code to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution produced 14 witnesses including Ganpat Rai (PW-7) complainant and Harichand (PW-13). Other witnesses are Ishwar Singh-ASI (PW-1), Mahipal-Constable (PW-2), Girish Kumar-Draftsman (PW-3), Wazir Singh-SI (PW-4), Jai Prakash-Constable (PW-5), Dr. P.L. Verma-Medical Officer (PW-6), PW-8 to 9 and 11-Constables; Rajender Kumar-Photographer (PW-10), Jai Chand Shastri who performed marriage ceremonies of deceased with accused-Appellant (PW-12) and Chander Singh-SI (PW-14). On behalf of the defence three witnesses i.e. Dr. Jasbeer Singh- (DW-1), Santosh-(DW-2) and Chajju Ram- (DW-3) were produced. The Trial Court by its judgment dated 22nd January, 2002 convicted the Appellant Under Section 498A and 304B Indian Penal Code and acquitted other accused. For the offence Under Section 304B Indian Penal Code the Appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and for the offence Under Section 498A he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Both the sentences awarded were ordered to run concurrently.
(3.) On appeal the High Court by impugned judgment partly allowed the same and the conviction and sentence of the Appellant Under Section 498A Indian Penal Code was set aside while upholding conviction and sentence Under Section 304B Indian Penal Code.;