LAKHVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-7-82
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 12,2013

LAKHVINDER SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. - (1.) PW 1 Bant Ram, father of the victim, gave a complaint (Ext. Ka -1) to Station House Officer, police station Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun, alleging the facts contained therein that his daughter was married to Lakhvinder Singh on 14.12.1997, at Dehradun. He himself was a resident of District Patiala (Punjab). PW 1 gave gifts and articles in the marriage of his daughter, to the best of his capacity, but the husband and in -laws of his daughter continued to demand the same even after marriage. They assaulted his daughter on the pretext of not bringing sufficient dowry. Informant's daughter was beaten on 14.06.1999 as well. The incident was disclosed to PW 1 by the neighbours of matrimonial home of his daughter. PW 1's daughter was killed on 16.06.1999 by pouring kerosene oil and setting her on fire. The accused persons, who were involved in the crime, were husband Lakhvinder Singh, mother -in -law, father -in -law and sister -in -law of the deceased. The victim died in the hospital. On the basis of the complaint (Ext. Ka -1), chik FIR (Ext. Ka -14) was lodged in respect of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 304B of I.P.C. After the investigation, a charge -sheet (Ext. Ka -8) was submitted against all the accused persons namely, Lakhvinder Singh, Shyam Singh, Smt. Harbans Kaur and Km. Parvinder. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions.
(2.) WHEN the trial commenced and prosecution opened it's case, charge for the offences punishable under Sections 304B and 498A of I.P.C. was framed against the accused persons, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. As many as 18 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. They were - PW 1 Bant Ram, PW 2 Ravindra Singh, PW 3 Gurditta Ram, PW 4 Ram Saran, PW 5 Ramjee Das, PW 6 Dr. Alok Tevatiya, PW 7 Kamal Kumar, PW 8 Smt. Kaushalya, PW 9 Smt. Santosh, PW 10 Krishna Lal, PW 11 Gulvindra Singh, PW 12 Paramjeet Singh, PW 13 Smt. Kasturi, PW 14 S.I. A.K. Gautam, PW 15 Constable Heera Singh, PW 16 Constable Jogendra Singh, PW 17 Constable Sant Ram and PW 18 A.S.P. Ajay Rautela. In criminating evidence was put to the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in reply to which they said that they were falsely implicated in the case. DW 1 Nahar Singh, DW 2 Jaspal Singh and DW 3 Amarjeet Singh were examined in defence. After considering the evidence on record, learned trial court found accused Lakhvinder Singh guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 304B and 498A of I.P.C. and awarded him rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years (under Section 304B of IPC) and rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - (under Section 498A of IPC). The other co -accused were exonerated of the charge levelled against them. Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 08.10.2001, present Criminal Appeal was preferred by Lakhvinder Singh and present Government Appeal was filed on behalf of the State against the accused -respondents Shyam Singh, Smt. Harbans Kaur and Km. Parvinder Kaur.
(3.) THE victim (Simran Kaur) was married to accused Lakhvinder Singh on 14.12.1997. The victim died on 16.06.1999, at 09:45 A.M. Postmortem of the deceased was conducted by PW 6 Dr. Alok Tevatiya, who in his examination -in -chief, proved postmortem report (Ext. Ka -3). Following ante mortem bum injuries were sustained by the victim: "Superficial to deep bum involving the entire body except sole of both feet and external genitalia. Smell of kerosene oil was present. Blackening on the burn parts was also present. Singeing of the hair, eyebrows, scalp and hair was present, line of redness was also present around burn areas." According to PW 6, the cause of death of the victim was shock as a result of ante mortem burn injuries. Thus, it is clear that the victim died otherwise then under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage. Two limbs of Section 304B of I.P.C. are therefore, established.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.