-1- Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. Date of Decision: April 01, 2010. Harbhajan Singh and another ... Appellants VERSUS State of Punjab ...Respondent 1. Whether the Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. Present: Ms. Shweta Bawa, Advocate, amicus curiae, for the appellants. Ms. Sushma Chopra, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. Appellants Harbhajan Singh and Mohinder Singh, who have been convicted under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short `the Code') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for -2- Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. nine months by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, have preferred this appeal against their conviction and sentence. The instant case was registered against the accused on the basis of statement made by complainant Rakesh Kumar, whose sister Kulwant Kaur (since deceased) was married with accused-appellant Mohinder Singh on 4.10.1997. Accused- appellant Harbhajan Singh is father of appellant Mohinder Singh. In this case charge against the appellants was framed under Section 304-B of the Code. However, they were not found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of the Code and were convicted and sentenced under Section 498-A of the Code, as mentioned above. The allegations against the appellants are that they subjected Kulwant Kaur to cruelty after her marriage with appellant Mohinder Singh. The parents of Kulwant Kaur had given sufficient dowry to her according to their capacity at the time of her marriage. Kulwant Kaur was given beatings by the appellants a number of times and turned out by them from their house. Complainant Rakesh Kumar, elder brother of Kulwant Kaur, Didar Singh, brother-in-law of Kulwant Kaur and her other relatives had left Kulwant Kaur in her matrimonial house. Kulwant Kaur (deceased) was given beatings by the accused on 16.6.2000 and again turned out from their house by the accused. Again, she was left in her matrimonial house by complainant Rakesh Kumar and others on 19.6.2000. While -3- Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. leaving Kulwant Kaur in the house of the accused, complainant Rakesh Kumar and others told the accused that they were poor persons and were not in a position to give any articles and the accused should not treat Kulwant Kaur with cruelty. It is the case of the prosecution that on 20.6.2000 at about 11 A.M appellant Mohinder Singh came to the house of complainant Rakesh Kumar in Village Mohla Bahadpur and told Rakesh Kumar that Kulwant Kaur had created a scene in their house and that the complainant had been called by appellant Harbhajan Singh. The complainant told appellant Mohinder Singh that he would be coming after finishing his work. At about 6 P.M on 20.6.2000, the complainant left for Village Jeevanpur Jattan to reach the house of the accused. When he was at a distance of about 1 Km from village Jeevanpur Jattan, one person who was passing by his side told the complainant that Kulwant Kaur had been admitted in Civil Hospital, Mahilpur. The complainant reached Civil Hospital, Mahilpur at about 7 P.M and saw the dead body of Kulwant Kaur lying in the verandah of the Hospital. At that time, no body was present there. The complainant called his relations to the hospital by telephoning them. The complainant alleged that the appellants had killed his sister Kulwant Kaur. Dr. Gurpal Singh, who had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Kulwant Kaur, after receiving the report of Chemical Examiner (Exhibit P.H) opined that the cause of death of Kulwant Kaur was the consumption of Aluminium Phosphide (pesticide -4- Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. poison). After completion of investigation, challan against the appellants was presented in the Court of the Ilaqa Magistrate, who committed the case to the Court of Session. The trial Court, after framing charge as mentioned above, recording evidence of the prosecution, statement of the appellants under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and hearing the learned counsel for the parties, convicted and sentenced the appellants under Section 498-A of the Code, as stated above. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. The accused-appellants, in their statements recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alleged that Kulwant Kaur was under depression due to the fact that her father had married another woman at Phagwara for the last three-four years which had spoiled the atmosphere in the family of the complainant party. No doubt, Didar Singh (P.W.2), brother-in-law of deceased Kulwant Kaur, in his cross- examination stated that the father of the deceased had committed second marriage and the deceased was feeling ill about it, but there is overwhelming evidence on record that the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the appellants. In this case, no specific allegation regarding demand of dowry was made in the First Information Report, but at the trial specific allegations were made by complainant Rakesh Kumar (P.W.1) -5- Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. and Didar Singh (P.W.2) about the cruelty meted out to the deceased by the appellants on account of demand of Rs.10,000/- and a `Tijori'. The improvements made by the witnesses while deposing in Court cannot be accepted. However, the facts and circumstances of the case point towards the fact that the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the appellants. In the original version, as contained in the F.I.R, the allegations against the appellants are that they subjected Kulwant Kaur to cruelty after her marriage with appellant Mohinder Singh; that Kulwant Kaur was given beatings by the appellants a number of times; that she was turned out of their house by the appellants; that complainant Rakesh Kumar, elder brother of Kulwant Kaur and Didar Singh, brother-in-law of the deceased, and her other relatives had left Kulwant Kaur in her matrimonial house; that Kulwant Kaur (deceased) was given beatings by the accused on 16.6.2000 and again turned out from their house by the accused; that again, she was left in her matrimonial house by complainant Rakesh Kumar and others on 19.6.2000; that while leaving Kulwant Kaur in the house of the accused, the complainant and others had told the accused that they were poor persons and were not in a position to give any articles; and that the complainant and others had told the accused that they should not treat Kulwant Kaur with cruelty. Kulwant Kaur ended her life on 20.6.2000. Thus, even a day before her death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the -6- Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. appellants. Dr. Gurpal Singh (P.W.3) had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Kulwant Kaur. After receiving the report of Chemical Examiner (Exhibit P.H), Dr. Gurpal Singh opined that the cause of death of Kulwant Kaur was the consumption of Aluminium Phosphide (pesticide poison). The term cruelty has been defined in Explanation (a) of Section 498-A of the Code as “any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life,limb or health (whether mental or physical) or the woman”. Under the circumstances, I do not find any fault in the impugned judgment of conviction, recorded by the trial Court. Accordingly, conviction of the appellants under Section 498-A of the Code is upheld. However, insofar as sentence of rigorous imprisonment of three years awarded to the appellants for this offence, the same deserves to be reduced keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. The occurrence relates to June, 2000. The Swords of Damocles has remained hanging over the heads of the appellants for more than nine and a half years. At the time of occurrence, appellant Harbhajan Singh was in his late sixties and now is at the fag end of his life. The appellants have already undergone about one year and two months' actual sentence. Taking into consideration these facts, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of three years awarded to the appellants by the trial Court under Section 498-A of the Code is reduced to the period already undergone by them, mentioned -7- Criminal Appeal No.741-SB of 2001. above. However, the sentence of fine and the default clause shall remain unaltered. The impugned sentence order stands modified to the extent indicated above while maintaining the conviction recorded against the appellants by the trial Court. With the above modification in the sentence order, this appeal is hereby dismissed. April 01, 2010. ( MOHINDER PAL ) ak JUDGE