- (1.) The instant application has been filed under Section 378 (4) of Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), seeking leave to file appeal against the judgement of acquittal alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condonation of delay of 40 days.
(2.) The facts of the case, when put into narrow compass, are that applicant Raj Kumari submitted a written complaint to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar, alleging that the accused namely; Rakesh Kumar (husband), Shanti Rani (mother-in-law) and Ashok Kumar (brother-in-law), have caused the death of her daughter namely; Anju Bala. In order to avoid repetition, the facts noted by the learned trial court, in para 2 of the impugned judgement, read as under :- "2. In brief, the prosecution story as mentioned in the police report is to the effect that Raj Kumari wife of Ram Chand submitted a written complaint to the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar, for committing dowry death by accused Rakesh Kumar (husband,) Shanti Rani (mother-inlaw), Ashok Kumar (brother-in-law). In the said written complaint, complainant Raj Kumari has stated that she is the mother of deceased namely Anju Bala. After marriage, name of Anju Bala was changed by her in-laws as Shakshi. At the time of marriage of their daughter on 30.9.2000, they gave sufficient dowry as per their financial position and incurred Rs. 1,50,000/- on the marriage. After the marriage, one daughter was born out of the wedlock. The complainant further stated that after marriage, her in-laws started maltreating her on less dowry. Further her daughter gave birth to another daughter namely Chahat. Her in-laws refused to keep her daughter in the matrimonial home and by giving beatings and in condition of illness, turned her out of the matrimonial home. She further alleged that she gave Rs. 5000/- and Rs. 10,000/- on 7/8 occasions and go on leaving her daughter at her in-laws house but her inlaws could be become satisfied. They did not get rehabilitated her properly. The complainant further stated that the main role in the whole occurrence is of brother-in-law of husband of her daughter as well as the mother-in-law. In January 2005, in-laws of her daughter started demanding one scooter and Rs. 1 lac for purchasing a plot and started putting pressure on her daughter to get fulfilled the abovesaid demand from her parents, which was impossible for her parents. Her daughter has to face the result of said harassment by losing her life. The complainant further stated that her daughter warned her in-laws that if she could not fulfill their demands, then she will commit suicide. Her daughter died on 20.4.2005. The complainant further stated that without getting the postmortem on the dead body conducted, the in-laws of her daughter, performed the cremation. Further, the in-laws of her daughter gathered their men and under the mental pressure got the signatures on a false agreement and after giving some articles out of the dowry articles, got mentioned in the said agreement that now there remains no dealing with them and the complainant party will not do any proceedings against them. She further stated that the malafide of the said agreement stands made out from the fact that death occurred on 20.4.2005 but the stamp paper was purchased on 19.4.2005. She further stated that nobody had seen the deceased while taking to the hospital for treatment. Some days ago, they had raised demand of scooter and Rs. 1 lac. On these lines, the complainant alleged that accused are responsible for the death of her daughter. So action be taken against them. After got conducting inquiry on the said complaint from the DSP of the area of Civil Lines, Amritsar, against Rakesh Kumar husband of the deceased and Ashok Kumar brother-in-law, challan filed while accused Prem Pal and Shanti Rani could not be arrested and were declared proclaimed. Thereafter, they were also arrested and supplementary challan was filed before the learned Illaqa Magistrate where requirement of Section 207 Cr.P.C. were complied with and the learned Illaqa Magistrate finding that one of the offence against the accused under Section 304-B IPC, is Sessions triable offence, case was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, from where by entrustment, it has been received in this court."
(3.) A prima facie case was found to be made out for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B/498-A of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short).;