IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 207 of 1998 Decided on : April 23, 2010 State of H.P. …Appellant Versus Tirath Ram and others ...Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant: Mr. Rajender Dogra, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajender Sharma, Advocate. Surjit Singh, Judge (oral) State has appealed against the judgment, dated 1.1.1998, of learned Sessions Court, Una, whereby respondents, who were tried for offences, under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 IPC, have been acquitted. 2. Prosecution’s case is that deceased Babita daughter of PW-1 Roshan Lal and PW-2 Kamla was married to respondent Tirath Ram in the year 1990. On 31.5.1993, she died around 8.30 or 9 p.m. Next morning, around 7 or 7.30, her dead body was cremated. Parents of the deceased were not informed of her death. PW-1 Roshan Lal, father of the deceased, came to know about the death on Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… the next morning, i.e. 1.6.1993, at 7 a.m., when he was present at his shop. He went to Police Station, Daulatpur. Police people asked him to first verify the news regarding the death of his daughter. So, he went to the in-laws of his daughter and came to know that his daughter had died and dead body had been cremated. 3. Report was lodged with the police on 2.6.1993 by PW-1 Roshan Lal. It was alleged that respondents, who are husband, husband’s brother, husband’s mother and wife of a brother of the husband of deceased, used to harass the deceased. Fifth respondent-accused Ram Murti is alleged to have acted as go-between to arrange the marriage between Ram Asra and Bebi. It was further reported that the respondents appeared to have killed the deceased by poisoning or strangulating her. Police investigated the case and challaned the respondent. 4. Prosecution mainly relied upon the testimony of the parents of the deceased and the circumstance that the dead body had been cremated without informing deceased’s parents. 5. PW-1 Roshan Lal stated that deceased used to tell her mother that the respondents harassed her. PW-2 Kamla, mother of the deceased, stated that the deceased used to tell her, during her visits, that her in-laws used to harass her at the instance of respondent Ram Murti. However, she did not say as to what was the reason for harassment. …3… 6. Both, the mother and the father of the deceased stated that dead body had been cremated without informing them. PW-2 Kamla, mother of the deceased, stated, in her cross-examination, that she accompanied by her husband went to the house of the in-laws of the deceased daughter on 1.6.1993, in the evening, to get back the dowry articles. She admitted that when the respondents refused to return the dowry articles, they lodged the report against them with the police on the next following day that their daughter had been murdered by the respondents. 7. There is absolutely no evidence on record, indicating that the deceased had been done to death. Also, there is un-explained delay in lodging the FIR with the police. Mother of the deceased, PW-2 Kamla Devi, admitted in the cross-examination that the report was lodged after the respondent refused to return the dowry articles. 8. In view of the above stated position, we see no merit in the present appeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed. (Surjit Singh), J April 23, 2010(ss) (V.K. Sharma), J.