Crl Revision No. 1827 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl Revision No. 1827 of 2007 Date of decision: 11.08.2008 Mohinder Singh S/o Diwan Singh ....Petitioner V/s Smt. Shanti & Others ....Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr. R.S. Chahar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jitender Dhonda, Advocate for the respondent. A.N.JINDAL J.(ORAL) This petition has been filed at the instance of the complainant against the judgment dated 12.03.2007 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Hisar, whereby he acquitted all the accused (here in referred as respondent) under Section 406 and 498-A IPC The impugned judgment has been scrutinized and arguments of the counsel for the petitioner have been heard. Brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that the daughter of the petitioner was married to Ranbir Singh (accused) on 11.02.1991 who was posted at HUDA Office in Hisar. At the time of marriage petitioner had given dowry worth Rs. 3,50,000/- to his daughter. But after few days of Crl Revision No. 1827 of 2007 2 marriage, the accused started beating and mis-behaving with his daughter and demanded more dowry. Once the petitioner gave Rs. 25,000/- in cash and a colour T.V. to his daughter but the behavior of the respondents did not improve. On 27.03.1993 his daughter gave birth to a female child at Sharma Nursing Home, Prem Nagar, Hisar to which her in-laws got annoyed and continued torturing her for female child's birth. In the month of September, 1995 Suman (daughter of the petitioner) along with her daughter were turned out from her matrimonial home for want of more dowry. On 08.10.1995 the petitioner along with his daughter and son visited the house of the respondents and requested them for not torturing his daughter, but the they were not willing to take her back till the fulfillment of their demand of a car. They beat his daughter and her son and pushed them out of his house. A case under Section 498-A, 406 read with Section 34 of IPC was registered against the respondent and investigation was carried out. The prosecution in order to substantiate the charges examined Mahender Singh PW1, Suman (daughter of the petitioner) PW2, Vikas (Son of the petitioner) PW3, Ved Pal PW4, Bal Bhushan PW5, Inspector Surender Kaur PW6. Thereafter, in their statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the respondent denied all the allegations and pleaded their innocence. Arguments heard. The view taken by the Trial Court was not in any way unjudicious or irrational. The proper procedure has been followed and evidence has been appreciated in the right perspective. The law is well- settled that in revision against the acquittal, interference would be called for only when the judgment is palpably perverse and is based on a misreading Crl Revision No. 1827 of 2007 3 of the evidence. However, it is equally settled that where two views are possible, the one taken by the Trial Court should not be disturbed. Finding no merit in the petition, the same is hereby dismissed. 11.08.2008 (A.N. JINDAL) Ajay JUDGE