1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 379 of 1999 Decided on September 14, 2010 __________________________________________________________ State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Parveen Kumar ...Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. ¹Whether approved for reporting? For the appellant: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General, with Mr.Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General. For the respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate. __________________________________________________________ Justice R.B. Misra,J. (Oral) The present Criminal Appeal has come up for adjudication after the grant of leave to appeal under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been granted in reference to judgment dated 25.5.1996, passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 22- S/7 of 1996, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, acquitting the alleged accused/respondent. 2. The prosecution case is that deceased Krishna was married to the accused, namely, Parveen Kumar and was found to have committed suicide by hanging herself in the matrimonial house on 15.7.1995. Smt. Bimla Devi (PW.7) sister of the deceased reported the matter to the Sadar Police. On this report, PW.10 Devi Dass, the then Investigating Officer, Police 2 Station Sadar, visited the spot and recorded the statement of PW.1,Raj Kumar, brother of the deceased, under Section 154 of Cr.P.C. Ex.PW.1/A. PW.1 brother of the deceased has stated that the deceased was his younger sister and she was married to the accused about 4 years ago and she had two children, who are school going. The accused was working in the Punjab National Bank at Shimla, as Safai Karamchari. Further that the accused was habitual drunker and used to torture and treat the deceased with cruelty, however, on the previous night, the accused was noticed running behind the deceased alongwith stick in his hand. The deceased had thus to take shelter in their quarter during that night and on intervention, she gave up the idea to commit suicide, and FIR No.220/1995 was lodged. 3. After investigation, the accused was arrested and charged for the offence under Sections 306 of the Indian Penal Code and the case was committed for Sessions Trial. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 10 prosecution witnesses, whereas, the accused through his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., has denied the prosecution case. 4. Out of the prosecution witnesses, PW.2 Raj Kumar, complainant, PW.3 Yog Raj, PW.4 Ram Pyari mother of the deceased, PW.5 Pawan Kumar, PW.6 Naresh Kumar and PW.7 Smt. Bimla Devi, sister of the deceased, material witnesses were said to have supported the prosecution case. 5. PW.2 Raj Kumar, complainant, while supporting the prosecution case, has stated that FIR Ex.PW.1/B was registered 3 by him. In view of testimony of PW.2, the deceased was treated with cruelty after one month of the marriage. The matter was reported to the police on several occasion, however, there is nothing in his statement under Section 154 of Cr.P.C., to that effect. It has further been stated by PW.2 Raj Kumar, that his sister (deceased) has been working as maid servant in different houses in her neighbourhood and even on the day of occurrence, she had gone to attend such work. 6. PW.5 Pawan Kumar, in support of the prosecution case, has stated that he is neighbour of the deceased, however, has expressed his ignorance that the accused used to advise the deceased to discontinue his relations with said Pawan Kumar but of no avail. PW.5 has also stated that immediately after one month of the marriage, the deceased was being treated with cruelty by the accused, however, at the best of his knowledge, no report was lodged in the police station or to his employer about such cruelty or maltreatment. PW.5 has further stated that about 8-9 months back, the accused was noticed by him under the influence of liquor and maltreating the deceased. On the day of occurrence, PW.5 was on his duty and when he came back in the evening, he found the police in the house of the deceased and he came to know that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging. 7. PW.7 Smt. Bimla Devi, sister of the deceased, in support of the prosecution case has stated that the deceased was being maltreated by the accused, however, PW.9 in cross- examination has stated that no report was ever lodged by 4 relative of the deceased to the police station about the threatening by the accused or maltreatment given to her by the accused. 8. PW.4 Ravinder Kumar, the then S.H.O. Police Station, Sadar, Shimla has prepared the challan after the completion of the investigation. PW.8 Dr.Tina Anand has conducted the postmortem examination and as per his opinion cause of death was asphyxia, as a result of ante-mortem hanging. PW.10 Devi Dass, Investigating Officer has prepared the map of the place of occurrence Ex.PW.1/A and taken into possession the broken pieces of bangles and the pieces of Chunni from the spot vide recovery memo Ex.PW.3/A and Ex.PW.3/B. 9. On scrutiny of the prosecution witnesses and materials on record, we find that there is nothing on record that the deceased or her sister or any of the relative have ever made any complaint to the police that the deceased was maltreated by the accused with cruelty. The allegation of the relative of the deceased was that the accused treated the deceased with cruelty and started maltreating the deceased immediately after the marriage and in consequence thereof, she was instigated to commit suicide, but no specific instance has ever been noticed by anyone and the prosecution could not bring on record that immediately prior to commit suicide the deceased was maltreated or treated with cruelty and consequent upon that behaviour or treatment, the deceased had committed suicide. Further allegations are that the accused was habitual drunker 5 and he used to maltreat the deceased under the influence of liquor. The mother, brother and sister, PW.4, PW.2 and PW.7 associated by the prosecution in support of its case, however, the independent witnesses Sh. Yog Ram (PW3.3) and Naresh Kumar (PW.6) as well as Pawan Kumar (PW.5) were hailing from the nearby area have also stated that the deceased was treated with cruelty by the accused under the influence of liquor. PW.2 Raj Kumar, PW.4 Ram Pyari and Smt. Bimla Devi (PW.7) have not come forward with that version that the accused was not maintaining the deceased as his wife. PW.5 Pawan Kumar said to have been made improvement in his version, because he never told the police about such incident in his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. PW.4, mother of the deceased and PW.7 sister of the deceased, both admitted that the deceased used to go to the residence of the PW.5 Pawan Kumar occasionally. PW.2, however, expressed ignorance qua this aspect of the matter. The possibility of PW.5 Pawan Kumar thus deposing falsely against the accused because of enmity can be ruled out. 10. On analysis of the prosecution witnesses and materials on record, learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly arrived at a conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. In our considered view also, the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt to the accused and there is no scope of interference in the findings given by learned Additional Sessions Judge. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present criminal appeal, 6 being devoid of any merit, is dismissed. 11. The bail bonds furnished by the accused/respondents are hereby discharged. (R.B. Misra) Judge September 14, 2010 (V.K. Sharma) (Purohit) Judge