- (1.) Parveen Bhatia, the appellant has brought this appeal against the judgment dated 12.2.2001 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Chandigarh vide which the appellant has been held guilty and convicted for an offence punishable under sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and also the order on sentence dated 13.2.2001 vide which the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years for the offence under section 304-B IPC. No separate sentence has been awarded to the appellant for the offence punishable under section 498-A IPC by learned trial court in view of the fact that substantive sentence had been awarded for the major offence punishable under section 304-B IPC. The case of the prosecution can be briefly noticed as under:- Azad Singh Tanwar, the complainant, is a resident of house No. 209, Sector 40-A, Chandigarh. His younger daughter, named, Nitu Tanwar (since deceased) got married with the appellant, Parveen Bhatia in September, 1997 at Solan. She performed court marriage with him there. After one month of the marriage, Parveen Bhatia and his brother Naveen Bhatia started harassing Nitu Tanwar. They used to taunt her by asking her as to what she had brought in dowry. They used to beat her and Nitu used to tell the complainant in this regard. The complainant talked to Parveen Bhatia in this regard. About 7-8 months thereafter, Parveen Bhatia shifted to house No. 1082, Sector 36, Chandigarh. They started beating his daughter and asked her to bring a sum of Rs.30,000/- from her father. On Nitu conveying this fact to the complainant, he paid this amount for her sake. About six months thereafter, Parveen Bhatia again asked Nitu to bring Rs.50,000/- from her father saying that he wanted to do some computer business. Nitu came to her father and asked him to give Rs.50,000/-. The complainant again gave a sum of Rs.50,000/- to her. Parveen Bhatia then told her that the said amount was insufficient. The complainant was told by his daughter that Parveen Bhatia wanted some more money and that he used to beat her. The complainant again gave a sum of Rs.29,000/- to them. At about 8.30 PM on 5.4.1999, Parveen Bhatia made a telephone call to the complainant asking him to immediately come with a vehicle to house No. 1082, Sector 36, Chandigarh. The complainant alongwith his wife, Laxmi reached there. The met Parveen Bhatia and his brother, Naveen Bhatia. Nitu, the daughter of the complainant was lying on the bed. Laxmi asked Parveen Bhatia as to what had happened to Nitu, to which he replied that he had gone to fetch milk and in the meanwhile, Nitu had done something. The complainant and his wife took Nitu to PGI in the car as she was having difficulty in breathing. The doctor at the PGI declared Nitu as brought dead. Parveen Bhatia and his brother Naveen Bhatia slipped away from that place. Claiming that his daughter Nitu had died on account of harassment and ill-treatment meted out to her at the hands of Parveen Bhatia and his brother Naveen Bhatia by making demands for dowry again and again, Azad Singh Tanwar lodged a report with the police. The statement of Azad Singh Tanwar was recorded by Ram Dhari, SI who had made his endorsement thereon and had sent the same to Police Station, Sector 36, Chandigarh on which the FIR was recorded.
(2.) During the investigation, inquest proceedings were conducted and post-mortem examination on the dead body of Nitu was got conducted in which it was found that the cause of death of Nitu was asphyxia due to hanging and that the hanging was ante-mortem and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. The investigating officer then went to the spot and inspected the same. He got the spot photographed and took the duppata into his possession after giving it the shape of a parcel and sealing it. He also took into possession the bed sheet by preparing a parcel thereof and sealing the same. The investigating officer then prepared a rough site plan of the place of occurrence. Azad Singh Tanwar had then produced photocopy of the marriage certificate of Nitu with Parveen Bhatia which was taken into possession by way of a recovery memo. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. Both the accused were arrested. On completion of other formalities of investigation, challan was prepared and presented in the court.
(3.) Charge was framed against the two accused for the offence punishable under sections 304-B and 498-A IPC on 11.8.1999 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.;