Crl. Appeal No.821-DBA of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Appeal No.821-DBA of 2002 Date of Decision:-17.05.2010 State of Punjab ....Appellant. Versus Assa Ram & Ors. ....Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr. D.S. Brar, Deputy Advocate General Punjab for the Appellant. Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for Respondent no.1. HEMANT GUPTA, J. State is in appeal aggrieved against the judgment dated 13.3.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana convicting respondent no.1 for an offence under section 306 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 6 months. The prosecution case was set in motion on the statement of Gurpal Singh, brother of deceased Raj Rani, on 1 Crl. Appeal No.821-DBA of 2002 October 25th, 1999 at 9.25 PM. As per the statement, Raj Rani is the younger sister of the complainant married in the year 1998 with accused Assa Ram. As per the complainant, after marriage all the accused i.e. including parents-in-law of Raj Rani started taunting and harassing the deceased by saying that she has brought meager dowry. They used to beat the deceased ocassionally and also turned her out from the matrimonial home. The complainant was apprised of the harassment at the hands of the accused during her visits to her father's house, 7/8 months prior to the death of the deceased. All the accused demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- from the deceased, but the demand could not be met. On October 25, 1999 at about 4.00/4.30 PM the complainant and his wife went to see the deceased in her matrimonial home as she was pregnant. The deceased told the complainant that all the three accused were extensively harassing her and demanding that she should bring a sum of Rs.20,000/- from her parents as they were in dire need of this money. Complainant pacified the deceased and they returned to their house. At about 5.30 PM, his other family members present in the house received a telephonic call from some child that the deceased had been murdered by all the three accused by sprinkling kerosene on her person. Complainant accompanied by his father Thakur Dass and brother PW-2 Gurmit Singh went to the house of the accused and found that she was lying dead with burns on the floor of her matrimonial home. A match box and plastic container for storing kerosene was also lying. 2 Crl. Appeal No.821-DBA of 2002 Complainant left his brother Gurmit Singh and some other relations near the dead body and went to lodge report. On the basis of such statement (Ex.PA), FIR (Ex.PA/2) was lodged by the complainant. After investigations were completed the accused were charged for the offence under section 498-A/304-B IPC and in the alternative under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution has examined PW-1 Gurpal Singh, who has deposed that dowry articles Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-73 as detailed in the recovery memo Ex.PB were taken into possession from the house of the complainant and PW-2 Gurmit Singh, brother of the deceased who has corroborated the statement of Gurpal Singh in respect of the demand raised by the accused. The prosecution has also led other evidence to complete the chain of circumstances to prove the charges against the respondents. Learned trial court found that the deceased was pregnant for the last 20 weeks and that there is no reason to disbelieve the complainant about earlier demand of Rs.50,000/- made by accused Assa Ram and thereafter the demand of Rs.20,000/- on the ground that he was in dire need of it. The court found that such demand is not connected with dowry yet such persistent demand coupled with the idleness of accused Assa Ram amounted to abetment for commission of suicide by the deceased and thus convicted Assa Ram under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. Mr. Saini, learned counsel for respondent no.1 has 3 Crl. Appeal No.821-DBA of 2002 pointed out that the judgment of conviction and order of sentence was not challenged by accused Assa Ram by way of an appeal before this court and by now he has completed five years of imprisonment imposed by the trial court. Though the demand of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.20,000/- can be said to be in relation of demands of dowry alone as such demands were not to raise loan. The learned trial court convicted the respondent for an offence under section 306 Indian Penal Code after holding that such demands were not in relation to dowry. Even if we do not agree with such reasoning but that will not vest jurisdiction with this court to reverse the findings of the court as such finding cannot be said to be perverse. Therefore, even if different view was possible in appeal but that will not be a ground to set aside the judgment of conviction so as to convict the respondent for an offence under section 304-B Indian Penal Code. Thus we do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned trial court, therefore the appeal is dismissed. ( HEMANT GUPTA ) JUDGE ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE May 17, 2010 Vinay *** 4