IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 138 of 2002 Date of decision: 28.06.2011 _____________________________________________________________________ The State of H.P. .....Appellant. Versus Rangila Ram & another. .....Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, J. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? _____________________________________________________________________ For the appellant: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General. For the respondents: Mr. Raman Sethi, Advocate. R.B. Misra, J. (Oral). The present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been granted in reference to the impugned judgment dated 25.06.2001, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. in Sessions Case No. 22-P-VII/98, acquitting the respondents-accused for the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC in reference to FIR No. 49 of 1997. dated 15.06.1997. 2. The prosecution case is that the victim/deceased (Swarna Devi) married in February, 1994 with accused-respondent Rangila Ram procreated one child from the wedlock. After some days of the birth of child, the victim / deceased was taken to her 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? ...2... matrimonial house by Pritam, elder brother of accused-respondent Rangila Ram. Because of maltreatment and cruelty allegedly made by the accused-respondents, victim/deceased consumed aluminum phosphide (poison) and died on 15.06.1997. After completion of investigation, accused-respondents were charged and tried for the aforesaid offences. 3. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses, whereas, accused-respondents through their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case. 4. PW-1 Dr. D.S. Chandel, Medical Officer, conducted the postmortem examination of the dead body of Swarna Devi and noted following aspects: “A body of moderately built female measuring 63 inches from vx to heal wearing red printed kurta and salwar white banyan black striped underwear a pair of white ears rings. Rigormorties present in fingers and toes. PM staining over the back. Greenish patch in right illiac-fossa. No ligature mark on the neck. Membrane brain and spinal cord were pale, otherwise normal. Walls ribs and cartilages, pleurac, larynx and traches, right and left lungs were place, otherwise normal. Both chamber of heart and large vessles were empty. All abdomen viscera were place otherwise normal. Stomach contains semi digested rice secretion small instentine contain chyle large intestine contain gasses and faceal matter. Bladder contains 200 CC urine. Muscles bones and joints were normal.” PW-1 (Dr. D.S. Chandel), however, did not notice any mark of injury on the dead body of the victim/deceased. 5. Smt. Premi Devi, PW-2, made a complaint alleging for ...3... maltreatment and cruelty against the accused-respondents due to which the victim/deceased had died. However, in complaint, PW-2 did not make any allegations that the accused-respondents were having illicit relation between them. So much so, Smt. Premi Devi, PW-2, the mother of the victim/deceased, in her statement has made improvements after improvements. PW-2 has stated in her statement, Ex. PW-2/A, as also in her examination-in-chief that she was not able to say that as to why her daughter had consumed poison. PW-2 has also very categorically stated in her examination- in-chief that whether her daughter Swarna Devi/victim/deceased was given beatings by the accused-respondents. PW-2 has, however, stated in cross-examination that she had told the police that Rangila Ram and Kaushlya Devi/accused persons were having some special intimacy. 6. Smt. Aruna, PW-3, the sister of Swarna Devi/victim/deceased, in her endeavour to support the prosecution case had stated that when she had gone with some food and other articles, she noticed her sister lying dead on a bed. However, PW-3 had stated that the dead body of the victim/deceased was lying on the bed with some broken pieces of bangles and there was impression of her hand on the floor of the room in which she was lying dead. Her mouth was smelling of poison and there was mark of injury on her person. PW-3 stated that the victim/deceased committed suicide because accused-respondent Rangila Ram used ...4... to torture her, beat her and was not providing her food and other necessities of life. Contrary to such assertions, PW-1, Dr. D.S. Chandel, did not notice any mark of injury or anything inconsonance to the statement made by PW-3, Smt. Aruna. PW-3 has also stated in her cross-examination that she had seen one blue mark on her back, another near left eye of the persons of the deceased. PW-3 also stated that the left wrist joint of the victim/deceased was moving freely as if it was broken. Her front private part was also swollen and on asking to accused-respondent, Rangila Ram, about the cause of injury, he started threatening PW-3 and she went out of the room. As per the testimony of PW-3, the injuries on the victim/deceased appeared to have been caused due to beatings, however, contrary to that no such injury of any kind was ever noticed by Dr. D.S. Chandel, PW-1, as such there is contradiction in the ocular evidence as well as medical evidence and in our considered view the testimony of PW-3 is not inspiring confidence. 7. When we look the testimony of PW-5, Rattan Lal, no recovery of broken pieces of bangles was made, however, Rattan Lal, PW-5, Up Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Tamber, turned hostile and had stated in his cross-examination that he is relative of accused-respondent Rangila Ram. PW-5 has further stated that husband of accused-respondent, Kaushlya Devi, is serving in the Army and has denied that accused-respondents Rangila Ram and ...5... Kaushlya Devi were having illicit relation. PW-5, however, also denied in cross-examination that Swarna Devi/victim/deceased has made three oral complaints about the maltreatment and cruelty and the same were settled by him. 8. Smt. Leela Devi, PW-6, the sister of PW-2, Smt. Premi Devi (the mother of the victim/deceased), being 'masi' of the victim/ deceased has stated in her examination-in-chief that where the dead body of Swarna Devi was lying, some vomit material was also lying on the floor. As per the testimony of PW-6, either the victim/deceased was killed by the accused-respondents or she might have committed suicide due to the maltreatment and cruelty meted out by the accused-respondents. PW-6 has stated in her cross- examination that when she met the victim/deceased last time about 2-3 months prior to her death at the house of her mother, she noticed that the victim/deceased was working as Water Carrier in a school. For about two and half years she had been residing at the house of her mother and thereafter she/victim/deceased had gone to the house of accused-respondent, Rangila Ram, about 15-20 days prior to her death. As per the testimony of PW-6, the victim/deceased was in service in the village of her parents' house and Molichak and Banuri are adjacent villages having no gap in between them. 9. On analysis of the testimony of PW-6, it appears that PW-6 was not sure about the cause of death of the victim/deceased. ...6... Had she been ever apprised of maltreatment and cruelty given by the accused persons, she could have very categorically narrated that the victim/deceased had died due to maltreatment and cruelty, but she has given confusing statements. From the testimony of PW-6 also, the maltreatment and cruelty made by the accused persons is not proved. 10. PW-7, Smt. Chhatanki Devi, an independent witness from the same caste of deceased, has stated that, whenever, she came across Swarna Devi she never made any complaint against the accused persons. Being an independent witness, PW-7 has not supported the prosecution case. 11. As per the testimony of PW-9, Shri Rahul Sharma, accused-respondent Rangila Ram was arrested on 16.06.1997, whereas, accused-respondent Kaushlya Devi was arrested by ASI in the month of April, 1998, however PW-9 had issued no instructions to ASI to arrest accused Kaushlya Devi. PW-9 had also not indicated in his cross-examination about the illicit relation between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2. PW-9 has also stated that on inquiry from the Pradhan and other villagers he was apprised that they have no knowledge of illicit relation between the accused persons. 12. On analysis of the prosecution witnesses and the materials on record, we notice that no specific complaint of maltreatment or cruelty was ever lodged by the victim/deceased ...7... before the Pradhan, Up-pradha or to any villager or to the police. The prosecution has not been able to bring anything which may indicate that the victim/deceased was given beating, maltreatment or the victim was subjected to cruelty which caused her death. Indisputably, the victim/deceased had died due to consumption of aluminum phosphide/poison and in view of the testimony of PW-1 there was no mark of injury contrary to the person of PW-3. For the lack of proving cruelty and maltreatment and the demand of dowry, the offence under Section 498-A IPC and maltreatment and cruelty is not proved, consequent upon, the offence under Section 306 IPC is also not attracted. 13. In view of the above, learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly arrived at the conclusion that the prosecution has not been above to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. In our considered view also, the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt to the accused-respondents. In these circumstances, criminal appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed. 14. The personal and surety bonds of the accused- respondents shall stand discharged. (R.B. Misra) Judge (V.K. Sharma) Judge 28th June, 2011 (virender)