IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGABH AT BILASPUR (Han. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) ‘ Criminal Appeal No. 657 of 1994 Chandrakant and others APPELLANTS VERSUS RESPONDENT State of Madhya Pradesh Shri Ranbir Singh Marhas counsel for the appeHants. Shr! Praveen Das Dy GA for respondent/State CRIMINAI APPFAL UNEmR author! 3m (2) OF THI: CODE OF ' CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. JUDGMENT (08.07.2010) ”This appeal is directed against the judgmen and order dated 9.06.1994 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No. 409/1992 convicting the accused/appellants under Sections 304—, B and 498-A [PC and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous mprisonment for ten years and two years respectively on each count. . vx solemnized’ with the accused/appellant No.1 on 21.06.1991. Further 'case iof the prosecution is that the deceased died on 12.11.1991 in her- matrimoniathouse after sustaining 80% burn injuries. On 12.11.1991 itself w- t. t erg intimation Ex P 6 was recorded on the baSIs of information given by the A55istant Surgeon Government hospital Ratanpur On 14.11.1991, father of the deceased namely Chhatram Sharma (PWe6) made a written report Ex. P—7 to the police alleging that the deceased was being harassed arid iii treated by the accused persons due to inferior quality of dowry articles and based on this FIR Ex P 11 was registered on the same day After investigation challan was filed on 26 12 1991 for the offence uncle section 304 B IPC 'ind the court below has framed charge against the r ccused persons on 18 02 1993 for the offen3e under section 498 A in the‘ It lternative u/s 306 and Section 498 A IPC o 3. So as to hold the accused/appellants guilty, prosecution has examined 13 witnesses in support,.of its case. Statements of the accused/appellants were also recorded under section 313 of the Code of H t 2 \ i 2; "-.Facts of the case In brief are that n’tal‘riage of the deceased Was“ ‘ \ l I m ' i L' a I ‘ a ,2” Criminal Procedure in which they denied the charges Ieveiled against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case This apart one defence Witness namely Amar Dhiwar (Dw—1) has also been examined by the defence In support of its case 4. After hearing the paities, the trial Court has convicted and ‘ sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned above. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on ‘ record .6; Counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was happy in x her matrimonial house and this fact‘is evident from the letter written by the deceased on 18.0111991.vide Ex. D~1. He submits that father of the deceased namely Chha‘tram Shanna (PW«E3) got his statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the date of u incident itself in which he has stated that there was'no demand of dowry by‘ . the accused/appellants nor any cruelty was ever meted out to the i deceased 'by them He submits that it was an unfortunate accidental case y where the deceased died on account of burn injuries but the pOSSIbility of i appellants being roped in a false case followmg the fashion of Victimizing the entire family for the bridal death,icannot be ruled out. He submits that there was no previous complaint ever made by the deceased either to the police or to anyone else regarding her being illtreated by the ’ accused/appellants for demand of dowry (ii otherwise According to the counsel for the appellants even the parents ofthe deceased had not made any complaint against the accused/appellants on earlier occasion. ’7. On the other hand, countering the submissions of the counsel for the ‘C appellants, it has been submitted by the State counsel that marriage‘of the deceased With the accusedVappellant No.1 had taken place on 27.6.1991 l months there-from which itself shows that she was being subjected to cruelty at the hands of the accused/appellants. He submits that the, defence has not been able to bringio‘ri record anything to show as to why the deceased committed suicide in her matrimonial home a and thedeceased died on 12.11.1991 i.e. within a short span of‘five I i ‘ A . ,. 3 w V .8. Chhatram Sharma (PW~6) ~ father of the deceased has stated that whatever demand of articles and cash was made by the fathef—in-law of ‘ the deceased at the time of marriage he had fulfilled the same He has stated that on 12 11 1991 one Amarnath had come to him and Informed that the deceased had died after catching fire from the stove After coming to know about the shifting of the body of the deceased to Bilaspur, he went to Dharam HOSpital, Bilaspur where one boy of Ratanpur came and informed him that the dead body of his daughter was lying in the police station. Then, this witness went to an advocate and told him about the incident who in tUrn advised him to get the matter reported to the police According to him on the same day he went to police station Ratanpur where his statement was recorded This Witness has stated that when after he death of his daughter he went back to his Village he was informed by his Wife that on account of insuffICIent and inferior dowry, the accused/appellants used to subject his daughter to cruelty. Subsequently, ‘ on the basis of this information received from his wife he had made a rien report ‘(EX. P—7) to th pole. l pagraph 12 of his crss ina, hi wis ta a ds r arrig h roUh the deces o s huse e she stay f 25 days. ereafter, his .sn-i— ha me his houe and stay ther for t hen he too he eeased with im. Trafter on the cc f h agai t e o s d s he m for abt to i i hs ‘ so—in lso. ed o short vit t him. This wie ha aditted h t iandletr . D-) was in the nd writing of s daughter i.e th deasd This witnes hs owever sed that the'decesed ha ve ed h of her bn sucd t an ind of crlty b the V ae/pelans 1 1 99 ly he as oe y hs » tha th eceasd a n arassed b em. Urmla (P~7) — mthe o h eae sed a t d w sue to ce b ls ees d bnt al ' ordg ts es, C T v e a rm s a bg —e e ans o the acced/appellan count of insfici and inferor owr articles. h s ad that hen t dceased. ha told these things to he, hr trtdughters amel Sangita Sada Mana were als tere. R bgt aed t hi o wher ed or ‘ Th onlaw d co to s ed e wo days and t k t dc h hee oasion i of Tija estival he ad n brought he decased t hi house an thi time s stayed with hi ou w months and durng this perod i n—law a us t pay is o tnss s m tat he nlte (Ex 1 ha hi . e ece s a h tat a‘ d ner inform im eig bjete o y k ue y ‘ , ccusdaplt and it is on 3 1 11 on w infrmd b i t ‘ .Wife t e de ws beig h y th t Bai W or f te decsd has tat tht he decease as bjcted rulty y the accused/appelant and they themslv ha ur her ive. _ Accin to hi witns on the ocasion of ija festial her daughtr hd infoed her thathe ws ein illtreatd at th hd f V ' usts on ac ufent i dy Se ha stte w he e d r e ohea ny , hn and jul o h , a ~ " t wtt e ic n ar o examtion ts tnes hassted tht 1:5 ay afte mae he ad - u — This witness admits that during the stay of the deCeased in the maternal house, her son—in-law used to visit her frequently and sometimes stay there for 1-.2 days but She did not ask Iiiim as to why he was harassing the deceased Krishna Kumar Pandey (PW~ ) the maternal uncle of.the‘ deceased through whom the marriage of the deceased wlth the accused/appellant No 1 had taken place has stated that except scooter no“ other demand was made by the accused/appellants. He has stated that the parents of the deceased had given TV, almirah, ceiling fan, ornaments etc. at the time of marriage This Witness has stated that he was informed by g the mother of the deceased that the accused/appellants had made a demand of Rs 10 000 Mamula Pandey (PW-9) the elder Sister of the ”deceased has stated that for the first time after the marriage, the deceased had visited her but did not disclose anything to her. However, on the ' I occasion of Rakhi festival when she had met the deceased in her maternal- -house, she had told her that the accused/appellants used to harass her, ‘ and‘also make a demand for Rs. 10,000. Dr.. Pradip Shukla (PW-1) is the witness who had first attended the deceased in her matrimonial house This‘witriess ,has stated that as the deceased was completely burnt, he had advised the accused/appellants'to take her to the hos'pital. Maniram U/‘(PW-2) — the neighbour of the accused/appellants has not made any v b specific allegation against the accused/appellants. He has stated that in his presence one stove, one cane containing kerosene, one handkerchief from which smell of kerosene was emanating and one matchbox were seized vide EX. P-1 which was signed by him also. He has stated that when he reached the house of the accused/appellants he saw the deceaSed " burning in the courtyard and was crying for help. As per post mortem report EX. P—5 cause of death was shock due to burn injuries. Kusumbai ‘ (PW-5) has stated that once the deceased had informed her regarding ill- .tr‘eatment at the~hands of accused/appellants for bringing'insufficient dowry. Inspector Ashok Mishra (PW-172) is the investigating officer who has supported the case of the prosecution. 9. I Thus from the statements of the witnesses what can be gathered is sithat the allegations made against the accused/appellants are general in‘ nature. Record shows that parents of the deceased have admitted that g i" duringthe‘stay of deceasedin her maternal home, accused/appellant No.1 ' T /\t Q u ] -5“— used to frequently visit and stay‘with them and had ther been any cruelty to the deceased at their hands, they must have made the complaint to him for the same. Most important thing in this case is the letter dated 18.9.1991 Ex. D-1 written by the deceased, English translation of which reads‘as unden ”I love you Jai Maa Durge / love you Shri Hari HO/y Place ‘ Baima 1 8/9/91 My Dear Raja, " / am fine and Wish you must also be fine. Am riting the letter and seek reply. Received your letter and am so very happy to have read it. / seek your pardon for replying belated/y. My dear Chandrakant why did you not come to Baima on 14/09/1997 when you came to Nagoi. You should have come. How should'not have felt bad, Papaji is like that only, The photographs taken have come and they have come out to be very fine, our photograph. You had cal/ed me ' through Sadhan and Sangeeta but what could l do as Babuji was sitting in between, therefore l could not come to meet you. That day l could not sleep the who/e night. l kept thinking about you only. l don’t have relief during the day or , the night. My dear Chandrakant, please do not come to take me now. This is my prayer and my request thoughl cannot ive without you one day appears like an your for me. Com‘e o take me after Dussehra only. Do not come before that. l‘ have received only one letter of yours. l suppose you have sent one more letter addressed to Babuji but that has not reached. l remember you a lot. Had l been a bird lwould have immediate/y flown to you. What more should l write to you, you are knowledgeable Song — “‘Kabutarja ja ..... I........... ” Sat to write to you and while writing started Ciying, could not express my feelings Flowers are flowers they blossom every season; your love is true which one gets birth after birth l write this with blood don’t think it’to be ink, l die in remembering you don’t think l am alive. p . Has Gopi Bhaiya come? Photographs might have come. Vlf hotographs have come then do send them. You do come once. / do not feel goOd Without you here. Eve/y moment l see yoursmi/ing face before my eyes. Blessing from mother and grandmother. Pranam on behalf of all three of us. ' ._ Note: Don’t show this letter to your friends. MyxPranafm to e ' Maa and Babuji Love to Seema” A bate reading of this letter reflects that the deceased was not having any omplaint against any of the accused/appellants. Language of the letter 1' makes~t clear that she was deeply attached with the accused/appellant e w l t c i -gr No.1 and while residing with her parents she used to miss his company. Had there been any complaint she must have mentioned the same in the said letter. This letter also does not reflect the demand of Rs. 10,000 allegedly made by the accused/appellant No.1. The other important thing in this 'case is the statement of Chhatram Sharma (PW—1) who has stated that he had lodged the report after being advised by the advocate. Thus according to the material available on record none of the witnesses has made any specific allegation against the accused/appellants regarding ill- treatment towards the deceased. 10. True it is' that in cases of bridal death, the Courts have to be very» ca’reful but at the same time it should also be borne in mind that in—laws and husband of the deceased should not be made to suffer prosecution in a false and fabricated case. The allegations made against the accused/appellants are of general nature‘and for that it would ’not be just o convict them under sections 498-A and 304-B IPC. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. impugned judgment convicting and sentencing the accused/appellants as mentioned above is set aside Accused/appellants re acqu1tted of the charge levelled against them They are already on l l ll Sd/- l Pritinker Diwaker ll Judge i l i « a a bl hr bond td harged Mi ai Tei bail s san disc : S i t