IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 332 of 2003 Date of Decision 2nd November, 2011 ________________________________________________________ State of H.P. ….Appellant Versus Geeta Devi & another ….Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. ________________________________________________________ For the Appellant: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. For the Respondents: Mr. Satyen Vaidya, Advocate. __________________________________________________________________ Dev Darshan Sud, J.(oral) The State challenges the acquittal of the respondents who were charged for offences under Sections 306 and 498-A readwith Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the IPC). 2. The facts in brief are that Ext.PA, report lodged by PW6 Sujata, sister of the deceased Puja, states that she used to be troubled by both the respondents Geeta Devi and Banwari Lal. 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 Geeta Devi had developed illicit relations with Banwari Lal which was disclosed by the deceased to her and that because she had seen both the respondents carrying on their illicit relations, they started troubling and taunting the deceased. PW6 Sujata then states that the deceased had informed her about this fact on a number of occasions telephonically as also through letters (we find that such letters have not been produced in evidence.). Besides these allegations, there is nothing on record which specifies any consistent treatment of cruelty or any other overt act which would have led the deceased to commit suicide by hanging. PW4 Dr. D.P. Swami proves death by hanging. This is an entirety of the evidence on record which the prosecution seeks to corroborate from the evidence of PW1 Smt. Santosh Sharma mother of the deceased, PW2 Vikas Sharma brother of the deceased, PW6 Sujata Sharma complainant and sister of the deceased. 3. We need not go in details of the entire evidence since we find that only two facts have been stated (a) both the respondents have illicit relations with each other, (b) because of the illicit relations, deceased was protesting which fact prompted them to treat the deceased with cruelty which ultimately forced her to take her own life. We also find from the cross examination of PW2 Vikas Sharma that though he states that the deceased has written letters about these relations, but no such letter has been produced. Three-four months prior to the incident, both the deceased and her mother-in-law, respondent No.1, have stayed with them (the complainant and her family). To similar effect is the statement of PW6 Sujata. 3 4. One letter Ext.PW3/B purportedly written by the deceased has been proved on record. A reading of this letter does not in any manner disclose that the deceased was being maltreated rather the letter is in general terms wishing her sister and other family members a Happy Diwali etc. The learned trial Court on the evidence on record holds that cruelty under Section 498-A IPC has not been established. The learned Court also holds that there is nothing on record to show as to what instigated the deceased to commit suicide and that the respondents could not be charged for offences under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 IPC. We find it strange that the daughter-in-law was tormented by her mother-in-law who developed illicit relations with respondent No. 2. If that be the case, we do not find any reason as to why she did not inform her husband about this fact. Looking at the evidence from any other angle, we do not find that the prosecution has been able to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt or that ingredients of Sections 498-A and 306 IPC are established on record of the case. There is thus, no merit in this appeal. Appeal stands dismissed. Bail bonds furnished by the respondents stand discharged. (R.B. Misra) Judge November 02, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud), ms Judge