IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 25 of 2002. Date of decision: 27.11.2008. State of H.P. ... Appellant Versus Sohan Lal & Ors. … Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant: Ms. Shubh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondents: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. V.K. Ahuja, J. (Oral): This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kandaghat, dated 16.2.2001, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charges framed against them under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 read with Section 34 I.P.C. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 6.5.1996, a complaint in writing was submitted by complainant Smt. Santosh to S.H.O. Solan, alleging that her marriage was performed with respondent No. 1 Sohan Lal about ten years ago and two sons were born, who are of the age of 8 and 9 years. It was alleged by the complainant that nine months ago, she had gone to her parents’ house for her treatment and remained there for six months. She alleged that during her absence, her husband respondent Sohan Lal brought another woman 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. - 2 - and started living with her illegally. It was alleged that when she came, she learnt the name of the said woman as Vidya Devi and when she enquired from her husband, he had stated that she was his second wife and respondents started giving beatings and quarrelling with her and also gave a threat that they will kill her. It was further alleged by the complainant that her husband was not providing food and clothing for her and her children and he had made illegal demands and two rooms were got constructed and she also brought a television as demanded by her husband and also pressed her to bring a buffalo, failing which she will be turned out. It was further alleged that these demands were made and respondent Sohan Lal again started demanding more money. It was alleged that on the previous date i.e. 5.5.1996, the complainant was given beatings by her husband Sohan Lal, Vidya Devi and her mother-in-law, Chango Devi, respondents and she was rescued by her four neighbours named by her. Thereafter, she came to lodge the present report, on which a case was registered and after investigation, the challan was filed as against the respondents, who were tried by the learned trial Court under the Sections mentioned above, leading to their acquittal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. A perusal of the record shows that the prosecution had examined 11 witnesses to substantiate their case. Coming to the statement of the complainant PW-9 Smt. Santosh, she has alleged about the demand made for construction of the rooms, demand of television and for buffalo, but no dates or period have been mentioned when these demands were made or when these demands were met since the allegations made are general in nature. Even allegations do not show - 3 - that these demands were made prior to the date when she returned back to her husband’s house or at an earlier date. Therefore, these allegations are vague in nature which have not been substantiated from the evidence. The complainant has stepped into the witness box as PW- 9. In her statement, the complainant has stated that she had gone for her treatment and when she returned after 3-4 months, she found that her husband had brought another woman, namely, Vidya Devi and had kept her as his second wife. She further stated that when she was maltreated and the money was demanded, she asked her father to build two rooms in the house of her husband and also brought a buffalo, which was demanded by her husband and television set was also given. In her statement also, she did not state when these demands were made and when these demands were met by her parents. She stated that she was given beatings on 5.5.1996 by the respondents and when she raised an alarm, she was rescued by her four neighbours named by her and she lodged the report with the police Ext. PW6/A. In her cross-examination, she stated that during the ten years she remained with the accused, she was being maltreated and was being given beatings, which is contrary to the version given by her real brother PW-1 Man Singh that his sister was being kept nicely by respondent Sohan Lal. The other brother of the complainant has also stepped into the witness box as PW-4 Nand Lal, who has clearly stated that the respondent was giving maintenance to his sister Santosh Kumari and was keeping the children nicely, who are still living with the respondent. PW-9 Smt. Santosh had further stated in her cross-examination that the house was built 8-9 years ago. She further admitted that she had filed several cases against the accused persons. She further stated that - 4 - when she was given beatings by the respondent with dandas, blood had oozed out and her clothes were also torn, but no such clothes have been produced by her in her evidence or during the trial of the case. She stated that quarrel took place with her in the kitchen and she went to her parents’ house on the same evening. PW-1 Man Singh, brother of the complainant, has stated that the respondents started maltreating his sister for the last 2-3 years. He states that the rooms were built 2-3 years ago, which is contrary to the version of the complainant that these were constructed 8 years ago. In regard to the purchase of buffalo, he has stated that it was purchased 8 years ago but he does not remember the date and no receipt was executed at that time. He has also stated that the complainant was kept nicely for 5-6-7 years. He has also stated that the house was built up 3-4 years ago, which is contrary to the version of the complainant. He denied the suggestion that Vidya Devi had been kept by the respondent to look after his mother and children. Out of the four neighbours named by the complainant who came to rescue her, she has examined two of the neighbours, one of them is PW-2 Dharam Dass, who has stated that last year Sohan Lal was giving beatings to his wife and he had not seen any other person giving beatings to her, meaning thereby that he has ruled out that other respondents were giving beatings to the complainant. He has stated that at that time Durga Ram had also seen the beatings but has not stated that they rescued the complainant apart from two other persons. He has also stated that earlier the respondent and his wife were living nicely. He has stated that he cannot say about the date of the beatings. He has stated that quarrel took place outside the house, which is contrary to the version of the complainant that it took place - 5 - inside the kitchen. He has stated that Sohan Lal was having a buffalo, which is still with him. The other neighbour examined is PW-3 Shrawan Singh, who has stated that about three years ago, he was sitting in the room of his house and some quarrel may be taking place in between the respondent and his wife. He called the Ward Member and has not stated that he had himself seen the beatings being given and he has further stated in his statement that in his presence, no beatings were given to the complainant by the respondents. He was declared hostile and was allowed to be cross-examined by the learned A.P.P. for the State. The other two neighbours who had allegedly rescued the complainant, Sant Ram and Durga Ram, were not examined by the prosecution. The complainant has also examined her father PW-5 Tulsi Ram as a witness, who has stated that after marriage he gave a buffalo to his son-in-law and also got constructed his house, but has not stated about the period when the house was constructed or buffalo was purchased. But he has stated that for sometime respondent behaved nicely and has stated about the period i.e. 1995-96 when he got treated his daughter. He has stated in general that the respondent(s) used to give beatings to the complainant since they wanted to perform marriage with Vidya Devi. He has stated about the report lodged with the police and the medical examination was got done. In his cross-examination, he has stated for the first time that the buffalo was purchased in the year 1987 He clearly admitted that his daughter lived with respondent Sohan Lal for 8-9 years and she was kept nicely apart from the children and the maintenance was also being provided by respondent Sohan Lal. He has stated that he cannot produce any receipt for the amount spent for the construction of the house or payment to the labourers. He has stated - 6 - that his daughter came to his house after 2-3 days of the beatings, whereas complainant’s version is that she came back on the same evening and had lodged the report on the next date. The prosecution has also examined Medical Officer PW-8 Dr. Sneh Gupta, who examined the complainant on 6.5.1996, at about 3.40 P.M., and found three injuries on her person, which were two contusions and one small bruise. She admitted that these injuries are possible by fall. From the above detailed discussion of the evidence, it is clear that the complainant’s statement has not been corroborated on material particulars from the statements of other witnesses and keeping in view the discussion made above, it cannot be said that the findings recorded by the learned trial Court holding that the prosecution has failed to prove their case against the respondents are perverse calling for an interference by this Court. In view of the above discussion, I hold that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant, which is dismissed accordingly. The bail bonds furnished by the respondents shall stand discharged. (V.K. Ahuja), November 27, 2008 Judge (BSS) - 7 -