@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Criminal Appeai No. 1153 of 1994. APPEI;LANTS Tikaram and others. VERSUS RESPONDENT State of Madhya Pradesh. Shri Vivek Sharma counsel for appellants. Shri U.K.S. Chandel PL for respondent/State. CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 (2} OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. JUDGMENT (28.01 .201 O) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.9.1994 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No. 155/1990 convicting the accused/appellants for_ the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs. 500 and rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 100, respectively for each offence plus default ‘ stipulations. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on the basis of merg intimation (Ex. P—13) dated 17.7.1989, investigation was conducted and FIR (EX. P-14) was registered on 28.7.1989 against the accused/appellants. It is alleged that marriage of deceased Chhaya Devi with accused/appellant Krishan Kumar was solemnized in the year 1982 and since then she was being harassed by the accused/appellants for demand‘of Rs. 10,000 as dowry. lt is also alleged that the deceased was not allowed to wear the sari of her choice. . ,l 3. So as to hold the accused/appellants guilty, prosecution has I . i examined 12 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the l accused/appellants were also. recorded under section 313 of the t s -z_ @ Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case. 4. After hearing the parties the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused / appellants for the offences as mentioned above. lt is worthwhile to mention here that during the pendency of appeal, appellant No.2 namely Smt. Ganga Devi has expired and the instant appeal is related to accused/appellants Tikaram and Krishna Kumar only. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the judgment impugned. 6. Counsel for the appellants submits that though the incident where deceased Chhaya has committed suicide by setting herself on fire is very unfortunate, nothing substantial has been brought fonA/ard by the prosecution to show that it is due to the act of the accused/appellants that she was forced to do so. He submits that presently the accused/appellant No.1 is aged about 89 years and his physical condition is pathetic. 7. On the other hand counsel for the respondent/State supports the judgment impugned. 8. Material available on record goes to show that Tija Bai (PW-1) is the witness of inquest and Anil Kumar Gupta (PW-2) is one of the witnesses of seizure of letter dated 15.12.1982 written by the deceased to her sister. Dr. Surendra Nath. Dubey (PW-3) is the person-who conducted post mortem on the body of the deceased. Dr. Vinay Kumar Gupta (PW—4) is the person who had first attended the deceased after she was brought to the hospital. Smt. Sarla andey (PW-5) is the elder sister of the deceased who has stated in her evrdence that the deceased had informed her that the: accused/appellants were deprrvrng her of food and not permittingi her to wear the sari of her chorce and thereby used to subject her to t cruelty. She has further stated’that just after four months of t marriage, the deceased had written a letter to her Ex. P-2 l @ mentioning that the accused/appellants were harassing her for demand of Rs. 10,000, and passing taunts on her for bringing insufficient dowry. In the cross examination this witness has categoricaily stated that the things mentioned in her Court statement were also stated before the police but if the same are not mentioned in the police statement, she was not aware of the reason thereof. This witness has also stated that she was informed by the deceased that whenever she used to go to the roof top, the accused/appellants were objecting to that. Hemant Kumar Sharma (PW-6) — brother in law of the deceased has stated in his evidence that the deceased had informed him that her husband (accused/appellant Krishna Kumar) was having some affair with his sister in law and on objection being raised by her he used to subject her to scolding and beating on account of which there used to be tension between the deceased and her husband. This witness has stated that whatever statement he has made before the court, was also made before the police also but by not mentioning the same in his police statement (EXP-11%) the Police is just trying to save the accused/appellants. Vinod Kumar Pandey (PW-8) brother in law of the deceas‘ed has stated that the deceased had informed him through his wife that the accused/appellants were harassing her and not permitting her to wear the clothes of her choice. He has stated that once the deceased had informed his wife that the accused/appellants were asking her to bring Rs. 10,000. According to the statement of this witness, the deceased was not having cordial relations with her mother in law. Ashish Sharma (PW-10) — the brother of the deceased has stated in his evidence that attitude of the accused/appellants towards his sister (the deceased)awas good enough. This witness has not made any specific allegation against them ln the cross examination this witness has categorically stated that he used to VISIt the accused/appellants frequently and sometimes used to spend the night also wrth them but he did not come across any mrs-behavror from their srde nor was there any demand of dowry reported to have been made by the deceased. Urv'asi (PW-11) — another sister of the deceased has not made any allegation against the accused/appellants. She has stated in her s ‘ @ evidence that the attitude of the accused/appellants towards the deceased was alright. She has further stated that in joint families, Iittie skirmishes are bound to take place and that is what might have happened with her sister also. She has stated that husband of the deceased had once demanded Rs. 10,000 for the purpose of securing job as he, at the time of marriage, was out of employment. She has stated that at the time of marriage of her sister, no demand of dowry was there by the accused/appellants. _,L(’_ 9. A closer look of the evidence of all the witnesses demonstrates that the version given by Sarla Pandey (PW—5) — elder sister of the deceased, Hemant Kumar Sharma (PW-6) — brother in law of the deceased and Vinod Kumar Pandey (PW-8) another brother in law of the deceased contains exaggerations, contradictions and omissions and therefore quite unsafe for this court to place implicit reliance thereon so as to convict the accused/appellants. Now as regards testimony of Ashish Sharma (PW-10) and Smt. Urvashi (PW-11) the sister of the deceased have not supported the case of the prosecution, rather they have admitted that the attitude of the acoused/appellants towards the deceased was alright and the deceased never told them about any harassment at their‘hands for whatever reason much less the demand of dowry. Prosecution has seized two letters written by the deceased i.e. (Ex. P-2 and P.—3) whereas the defence has produced two letters (Ex. D-1 and D—5) written by the sister of the deceased namely Urvashi but in none of them even a single specific allegation has been made against the accused/appellants regarding any ill treatment against the deceased. On the contrary, the letter written by the deceased on 28.7.1982 (Ex. D-5) shows that the relations between her .and accused/appellant Krishna Kumar were very cordial. This apart, the brother and sister of the deceased namely Ashish Sharma (PW—10) and Urv‘ashi (PW-11) respectively have stated that the deceased had never informed them of any cruelty ever meted out to her, rather they have stated that their attitude towards their sister (the deceased) was good enough. l ._.$"" @ 10. Thus, thoughtful consideration of the overall material available on record leaves no hesitation in the mind of this Court to draw a conclusion that the prosecution has not been in a position to bring forth anything against any of the accused/appellants to attract the ingredients of abetment enshrined under Section 107 IPC for convicting the accused/appellants under section 306 IPC much less the ingredients necessary for convicting the accused under Section 498-A IPC, on the basis of which confirmation of their conviction under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC becomes a necessity. 11. Consequently, the impugned judgment dated 23.9.1994 Convicting and sentencing the accused/appellants as mentioned above being weak-limbed cannot be allowed to stand and accordingly it has to be struck down. Appeal is thus allowed and the judgment impugned is set aside. Appellants are awarded acquittal of the charges levelled against them. The appellants are already on bail and therefore their bail bonds stand discharged. ‘ ll Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker Judge. .\