- (1.) This appeal is filed by three appellants, namely Buta Singh, Rattan Singh and Swinder Kaur to impugn their conviction for offences under Sections 304-B IPC, 201 IPC and 498-A IPC, on account of death of Davinder Kaur, daughter-in-law of appellant Nos.1 and 3. Rattan Singh (appellant No.2) is the elder son of appellant Nos.1 and 2 and is their co-accused. Upon their conviction, the appellants were directed to undergo sentence of RI for seven years coupled with fine of Rs.5,000/- each for their conviction for an offence under Section 304-B IPC. In default of payment of fine, they were further to undergo RI for six months. They all were sentenced to one year RI and a fine of Rs.500/-each for their conviction under Section 201 IPC and two years RI for their conviction under Section 498-A IPC, besides fine of Rs.2,000/- each. In default of payment of fine in respective cases, they were to undergo RI for one month and three months respectively.
(2.) Appellants Buta Singh and Swinder Kaur were 77 and 72 years old, respectively, at the time of trial. They both are no more and have breathed their last. Their death certificates are on record and this factum of their deaths is not disputed by the State counsel. The appeal qua them, therefore, would stand abated. This appeal, thus, would now survive only qua appellant Rattan Singh.
(3.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Nirmaljit Kaur, elder daughter of the complainant, was earlier married to Kulwant Singh, younger son of late Buta Singh. Out of this wedlock, two children were born. Unfortunately, Nirmaljit Kaur died a natural death two years prior to the present occurrence. Complainant had then married his second daughter Davinder Kaur to said Kulwant Singh. As per the complainant, he had married his second daughter on insistence of Kulwant Singh and the appellants. Complainant would allege that after 4-5 months of the marriage, Davinder Kaur came to him 3-4 times and complained that the appellants were harassing and treating her with cruelty on account of inadequate dowry. Complainant has further alleged demand of dowry on the part of appellants, which the complainant was unable to fulfill because of his economic compulsion. As per the complainant, he thought of giving some adequate dowry to make her daughter happy after harvesting crop, but unfortunately he received a message on 12.9.1992 that his daughter was unwell. Soon thereafter, he received another message intimating that his daughter had died at about 5/6 AM on 12.9.1992. When the complainant alongwith his relatives reached the village of the appellants, he found that his deceased daughter had already been cremated. As the complainant was going to police station to lodge the complaint, SHO met him enroute and he, therefore, registered the present FIR against the appellants. It is in this background that three appellants, two of whom are no more, were prosecuted and finally sentenced as already noticed.;