JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Sanjeev Kumar, appellant (to be described as Rs.accusedRs.) and
Sonia, his sister-in-law, faced trial on the charges under Section 498-A and
Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity
Rs.IPCRs.), for having subjected Rekha wife of Sanjeev Kumar, appellantaccused to cruelty and harassment, with a view to force her to meet the
unlawful demand of dowry from her parents, and for committing her murder
by intentionally causing death of Rekha (deceased) . Vide judgment, dated
1.11.2006, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar,
Sonia, co-accused was acquitted of the charges by extending her benefit of
doubt and Sanjeev Kumar, appellant was convicted of the said charges
vide judgment dated 01.11.2006 and awarded sentences vide order dated
03.11.2006 as under:-
(i) Under Section 302 IPC
To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
Rs. 5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo
rigorous imprisonment for one year.
(ii) Under Section 498-A IPC
To undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to
pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to
further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.
Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment ordered to run
concurrently. Co-accused, namely; Sonia was acquitted of the charges
framed against her.
(2.) According to the prosecution, Assistant Sub Inspector (for
brevity Rs.ASIRs.) Tarsem Lal of Police Station-A Division, Amritsar, on receipt
of information from Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar, about the
admission of Rekha (deceased) with burn injuries, reached there,
alongwith other police officials. He moved an application, seeking opinion
of the doctor, for recording the statement of the victim. The doctor found
Rekha, fit to make the statement.
(3.) The version that emerges from the statement of Rekha
(deceased) recorded by ASI Tarsem Lal, is that her marriage was
solemnized on 10.5.1996 i.e. about 10 years ago, with the appellantaccused. Three sons were born from the wedlock and Punnu (PW-4) was
the eldest, aged about 9 years. Her husband was running business of
making large steel trunks. His income is meager but he was addicted to
liquor. On that account, the accused had incurred debt. The accused
alongwith his mother Janak Rani and Sonia wife of his elder brother,
namely; Kalu had been harassing her, demanding money from the parents
of the deceased. Six months before the occurrence, father of the
deceased had paid Rs. 20,000/- in cash to them and they were able to clear
the debt. They again started pressing her to bring more money, for which,
she had expressed her inability, as her parents were not financially sound.
Therefore, the appellant and his aforesaid relatives used to harass her.
She was residing with her husband and children, on the second floor of the
house, whereas her mother-in-law and Sonia with family, were residing on
the first floor and the family of paternal uncle of Sanjeev Kumar, appellantaccused were occupying the ground floor.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.