Criminal Revision No. 1664 of 2009 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No. 1664 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 3.11.2009 Faquira Singh ..... Petitioner vs The State of Punjab and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. AK Walia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the judgment dated 2.1.2009 vide which the learned court below has acquitted the accused- respondents. The brief facts are that complainant Faquira Singh lodged a complaint with the facts that he has got two sons and four daughters. His daughters Paramjit Kaur and Jaswant Kaur had been married about 18 years ago with two real brothers, namely, Gurmail Singh and Jagmail Singh, residents of Village Ghagga. Jagmail Singh, his brother Darshan Singh and sister-in-law Bhajan Kaur used to harass Jaswant Kaur as his son-in-law Jagmail Singh was having illicit relations with Bhajan Kaur. He used to spend all his earnings on Darshan Singh and Bhajan Kaur. Whenever Jaswant Kaur used to stop her husband from doing so, the above named persons used to give her beatings and also insult her. The complainant and his relatives intervened many times but all in vain. He further alleged in the complaint that on 29.6.2005 at about 7.00 am his daughter Paramjit Kaur gave information to him on telephone that the accused-respondents have given beatings to Jaswant Kaur and have taken her dowry articles. She also informed that Jaswant Kaur had left house on a bus towards Bhakra canal. When the complainant, Paramjit Kaur and other persons reached at Bhakra canal bridge, then Jaswant Kaur jumped into the canal just before their eyes. It was alleged that she had taken this extreme step due to illicit relations of Bhajan Kaur and her husband Jagmail Singh. On completion of investigation, challan was presented against the accused-respondents. They were charge-sheeted under Sections 306 and 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Criminal Revision No. 1664 of 2009 (2) After conclusion of trial, the trial court acquitted the accused- respondents of all the charges. It is against this judgment that the petitioner is before this court. The main prosecution witness to the present occurrence is PW5 Paramjit Kaur who was married in the same house to the real brother of the husband of the deceased. She deposed in her examination-in-chief that Jaswant Kaur had committed suicide on account of beatings given by the accused- respondents as she used to stop her husband regarding illicit relations with accused-respondent- Bhajan Kaur. She deposed that on the day of occurrence when her sister left the house for Bhakra Canal, she alongwith her husband followed her on the scooter and no co-villager had gone with them. She also admitted that there was no bus stop on the bridge of the canal. Her sister had jumped in the canal when they were at some distance. This prosecution story is falsified from its own witnesses. PW3 Faquira Singh in his complaint stated that PW5 telephonically informed that the accused-respondents had given beatings to the deceased Jaswant Kaur and had also taken her dowry articles and as such she left her house on a bus towards Bhakra Canal. When he, his daughter PW5 Paramjit Kaur and other persons reached at the canal, then Jaswant Kaur jumped into the canal just before their eyes, whereas PW5 in her examination-in-chief stated that she had gone with her husband on a scooter and nobody had accompanied them to canal. The other part of the prosecution story that PW5 deposed in his examination-in-chief is that her father and other relatives met her only around noon at her residence and not at the canal whereas PW3 in his complaint stated that on 29.6.2005 at about 7.00 am his daughter Paramjit Kaur gave information to him on telephone that the accused- respondents had given beatings and have taken her dowry articles and due to this Jaswant Kaur had left house on a bus towards canal and when he, his daughter Paramjit Kaur and other persons reached at Bhakra canal bridge, then Jaswant Kaur jumped into the canal just before their eyes, which cannot be believed. In the presence of such contradictions in the statements of the witnesses, it cannot be said that the trial court has gone wrong in acquitting the accused-respondents. Moreover, PW2 Santokh Singh, had also not been able to substantiate that deceased Jaswant Kaur had jumped into the canal in his presence. The medical evidence produced by the prosecution has also not supported the prosecution version. PW5 in her deposition stated that the accused respondents had given beatings to the deceased on the day of occurrence for about 10-15 minutes, however, as per post mortem report there was no external mark of injury on the dead body of the deceased, which falsified the deposition of PW5. Criminal Revision No. 1664 of 2009 (3) Last but not the least, none of the family members from in-law or parental side of the deceased Jaswant Kaur had ever lodged complaint with the police about the illicit relation of accused-respondent Jagmail Singh with accused- respondent Bhajan Kaur. On the basis of so many contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses it cannot be said that the accused-respondents had abetted the commission of suicide by Jaswant Kaur. In view of the above, it cannot be said that the court below has committed any error in acquitting the accused-respondents. Accordingly, findings of the court below are upheld and the revision petition is dismissed being without merit. Since the revision petition has been dismissed, the application for condonation of delay is also dismissed. 3.11.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge