- (1.) Respondent-Sanjay along with his co-accused- Satya Parkash faced trial for an offence under Sections 498-A and 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code in FIR No. 237 dated 27.9.2007 registered at Police Station Sampla. The trial Court, vide judgment dated 26.10.2009, acquitted respondent-Sanjay of the charges framed against him. Hence, the present petition by the complainant. "The prosecution case in brief is that Poonam was married to Sat Parkash s/o Dilbagh Singh r/o Naya Bass on 4.11.2003 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Complainant party had spent a lot of money on the marriage of Poonam. After some days of marriage, in-laws of Poonam i.e. her husband Satya Parkash Dewar Sanjay, mother-in-law Rampati and father-in-law Dilbag Singh started taunting her for not bringing sufficient dowry and they used to beat her. They also put up a demand of L 10,000/- which was fulfilled by the parents of Poonam . Thereafter, a son was born out of the wedlock and at the time of ceremony of Chuchak, in-laws of Poonam put up a demand of L 21,000/- in cash and motor cycle. The said demand could not fulfilled and as a result of this, Poonam was given merciless beatings. Poonam informed her parents on telephone in respect of beatings given to her by the accused for not fulfilling their demands. For about two months, Poonam lived in her parental home and, thereafter, Sat Parkash took her back with assurance that he would keep keep her happy but after 10-15 days, she informed the complainant that her-in-laws were demanding money and used to beat and taunt her. On 26.9.2007, neighbour of Sat Parkash telephonically informed the complainant party that inlaws of Poonam had poured kerosene oil on her and had set her on fire and due to burn injuries, she was admitted in the hospital ."
(2.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed.
(3.) The trial Court, while acquitting respondent- Sanjay of the charges framed against him, held as under:- "There is a merit in this submission that it is proved on record that Sanjay was living separate along with parents, from deceased and Satya Parkash. It is also proved that he received burn injuries while saving Poonam and he remained admitted in hospital for 10 days. Even PWs, father of deceased also admitted in his cross-examination that Sanjay was admitted in PGIMS, Rohtak, due to burn injuries, which he received while trying to save Poonam. Sanjay and Satya Parkash were having separate ration cards and had paid separate chula tax (fire tax) and he was residing on ground floor of the house whereas Satya Parkash was living on the first floor. This shows that he has nothing to do with affairs of Satya Parkash and his deceased wife. Sanjay was certainly not any beneficiary out of the matrimonial transaction between his brother and sisterin- law. Now a days, there is a growing tendency to rope in all the relatives of husband in the matrimonial dispute. Even during the pendency of trial, an application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. Was moved to summon parents of Smt. Parkash as additional accused. That application was dismissed vide order dated 24.9.2008. There are no specific allegations of demand & torture on the part of accused Sanjay whose name has been arrayed as accused just to increase the number of accused persons. There is no evidence to show that accused Sanjay raised demand for any joint benefit alongwith his brother. No specific role has been assigned to him and he has been charged just because he happened to be brother of accused Sat Parkash. Accordingly by extending benefit of doubt, accused Sanjay is acquitted of the charge framed against him. His bail bond and surety bond stands discharged.";