IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.Appeal No. 309 of 2004. Decided on: 10.10.2011. ___________________________________________________________ State of H.P. … Appellant. Versus Harnam Singh & others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant : Mr. P.K. Sharma, Addl.AG and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy.AG. For the respondents : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________ Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral). The State is in appeal against the judgment dated 29.11.2003 of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class-II, Hamirpur, H.P. in Criminal Case No. 50-II of 2001, titled State of H.P. versus Harnam Singh and others whereby the respondents herein who shall hereinafter be referred to as the accused and denoted as A1, A2, so on and so forth, were acquitted for the offences under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. 2. Whereas, A3 Kalan Devi and A4 Chhanga Ram are parents-in-law of the complainant, Smt. Reeta Singh (PW-1), A1 Harnam Singh and A2 Ashok Kumar are her brothers-in-law. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that the complainant was married to Dalip Singh, who resides in United State of America (USA), on 7.3.2000. It appears that Dalip Singh left for USA after the marriage. Thereafter, except for short intervals, the complainant stayed at her parental house. It was alleged that during 15.4.2001 to 26.10.2001, the accused in furtherance of their common intention subjected the complainant to frequent physical and mental torture and treated her with cruelty at the matrimonial home. It was further alleged that on 26.10.2001 at about 5.30 p.m. at the matrimonial home, the accused insulted the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 complainant by abusing her and threatened her with dire consequences to her life. It was in such circumstances that she moved application Ext. PW1/A to the President, Gram Panchayat, Rangar, who forwarded the same to the police on the basis of which FIR Ext. PW6/A was registered. 4. On completion of investigation, the accused were sent up to face trial. On being charged, they did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution evidence followed. In all, it examined six witnesses. 5. On close of the prosecution evidence, the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein they pleaded innocence and false implication. However, they did not lead any evidence in defence. 6. After hearing the parties, the learned trial Judge proceeded to acquit the accused. 7. I have heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the appellant-State, learned counsel for the respondents- accused and gone through the record. 8. The learned trial Court has acquitted the accused mainly on the grounds that there was no complaint by the complainant either to neighbours or to the Panchayat regarding any harassment or maltreatment or beatings etc. No such complaint was also made to the police at any point of time. There was also total lack of medical evidence to support the allegations regarding beatings having been given to the complainant by the accused. Still further, whereas persons, who could be said to be independent witnesses relating to the alleged occurrence of 26.10.2011, were not associated by the police during investigation of the case, only interested witnesses were examined. One of the witnesses, namely, PW-3 Shri Kehar Singh, who was stated to have arrived at the spot at the time of the alleged occurrence and thus, could be 3 said to be an independent eye witness, did not support the prosecution case on material particulars. PW-4 Shri Ramesh Chand, President, Gram Panchayat, has categorically stated that the complainant never complained against the accused before the alleged occurrence. 9. There is stark contradiction between the testimony of the complainant as PW-1 and PW-5 Shri Lal Singh relating to the alleged occurrence of 26.10.2001. Whereas, according to the complainant, on that day, the accused persons had started hurling abuses on her and A2 Ashok Kumar had caught hold of her from her hair and dragged her out. However, PW-5 Shri Lal Singh has stated that A3 Kalan Devi had caught hold of the complainant from her hair and dragged her out. Such variance in the statements of the complainant and PW-5 Shri Lal Singh cannot be lightly over looked as the same casts a very serious doubt on the very genesis of the prosecution case. 10. The documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution in the form of letters Ext. PX, Ext. PY and Ext. PW1/B also does not lend credence to the allegations levelled by the complainant against the accused as a combined and harmonious reading of these letters would go to show that the complainant was mainly dissatisfied with her husband, who according to her was not in communion with her telephonically. These letters further go to show that in the absence of the husband of the complainant, who was in USA, she was having some adjustment problems with the accused. 11. The complainant while appearing as PW-1 has admitted during cross-examination towards the end that at the time of marriage, her husband had gifted her golden ornaments weighing 1 kg. 4 12. In view of the above narrative, I am satisfied that the prosecution was not able to bring home guilt against the accused within the meaning of Section 498-A IPC and other offences alleged against them. Thus, the impugned judgment dated 29.11.2003 does not suffer from any legal or factual infirmity. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. October 10, 2011. (cr)