IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No.: 160/1998 Decided on: 20.3.2010 _____________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh. …Appellant. Versus Kewal Kumar. …Respondent. _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. Anup Chitkara, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Surjit Singh, J (oral). State has appealed against the judgment dated 6.8.1995 of the trial court, whereby respondent Kewal Kumar has been acquitted of the charge, under section 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution is that deceased Reeta Devi was married to the respondent about 1 ½ years prior to her committing suicide. She committed suicide on 15.10.1996 by consuming aluminum phosphate. Report was lodged with the police by the father of the deceased, vide statement Ex.PW-12/A dated 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? . 2 16.10.1996. The father of the deceased reported that deceased used to be harassed by the respondent as he suspected her fidelity. 3. Prosecution examined PW-2 Sher Singh, the father, PW-3 Jhallo Devi, the mother and PW-4 Kartar Singh, a brother of the deceased to prove the allegation of harassment. Respondent denied that he ever harassed the deceased suspecting her fidelity. 4. Trial Court acquitted the respondent holding that there was no evidence that the respondent was, in any way, responsible for the commission of suicide by the deceased. 5. We have heard the learned Assistant Advocate General as also learned counsel representing the respondent and perused the record. 6. Though the father, the mother and the brother of the deceased, namely, PW-2 Sher Singh, PW-3 Jhallo Devi and PW-4 Kartar Singh, respectively, testified that the deceased used to complain that she was harassed by the respondent because the latter suspected her fidelity, none of them testified the manner and the mode of alleged harassment of the deceased by the respondents. As a matter of fact, from the testimony of mother of the deceased PW-3 Jhallo Devi, it appears, that respondent was very fond of the deceased, to the extent that he stayed with the deceased at her parents’ place for a period of nine days, leaving his business unattended, even though his father-in-law (PW-2 Sher Singh) did not like it. 3 7. In view of the above stated position, we see no merit in the appeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed. (Surjit Singh), J (Rajiv Sharma), J 20.3.2010 *awasthi*