Judgment:
Harphul Singh Brar, J.
1. This judgment will dispose of an appeal filed by the State of Punjab i.e. Cr. A. No. 240-DB A/89 against the judgment/order, dated 16-7-1988 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar vide which Baldev Singh was acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge of the charge made against him Under Section 302, I.P.C. as well as the appeal filed by Baldev Singh i.e. Cr. A. No. 313-SB of 1988 against his judgment/order, dated 16-7-1988, vide which he was convicted by the additional Sessions Judge Under Section 304-B, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years.
2. The factual position as alleged by the prosecution is that about six months prior to. the present occurrence, Paramjit daughter of Darshan belonging to village Mahmowal was married with Baldev Singh accused. It was alleged that Baldev Singh accused and his three co-accused who happened to be his parents and brother, were not satisfied with the dowry which Paramjit had brought in the marriage and they took it as their insult. Paramjit-deceased. brought this fact to the notice of her father who contacted Prem Singh Sarpanch. The father of the girl then brought her to his house. The accused then sent a message to the father of the girl that some gold ornaments be given to them and only then, Paramjit could be brought back to the matrimonial home. The matter was, however, ultimately compromised with the intervention of the respectables and Paramjit left for the matrimonial home with Baldev Singh-accused about 14 days before the occurrence. The father of the deceased again visited her about 5 days before the present occurrence when Paramjit-deceascd told her father that she apprehended danger to her life at the hands of the accused.
3. It was then on 12-9-1987, when Darshan father of Paramjit-deceased received a message that his daughter had died. He went to the Village of the accused and thereafter brought the police machinery into motion by making his statement Ex. PC to the police and on its basis, the present case was registered.
4. A.S.I. Gurmej Singh inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the inquest report Ex. PD on the dead-body of Paramjit-deceased. He sent the dead-body for post-mortem examination.
5. On 16-9-1987, Baldev Singh-accused contacted Satwant Singh, Sarpanch of Village Talwandi Sanghera and made extra-judicial confession before him to the effect that on the night intervening 11/12-9-1987, when Paramjit-deceased had retired to bed, all the four accused overpowered her. Baldev Singh accused, i.e. the convict-appellant forcibly put insecticide into the mouth of Paramjit-deceased when the deceased had been held by the other three accused by her legs and long hair. As a result of poisoning, Paramjit died the same night. Baldev Singh-accused requested Satwant Singh PW to produce them before the police, and all the four accused were then produced before A.S.I. Gurmej Singh on 16-9-1987 and were accordingly arrested. On the completion of the investigation, the accused were challaned to the Court of Illaqa Magistrate, Nakodar who then committed the case for trial.
6. On a prima facie case being found by the trial Court,, the accused were charged for an offence Under Section 302, I.P.C. and in the alternative, for an offence Under Section 304-B, I.P.C. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial.
7. The prosecution to support its version, examined as many as six witnesses, and tendered into evidence the affidavits of formal witnesses namely MHC Jagdish Singh, Constables Multan Singh and Udhan Ram and the statements of these witnesses contained in their affidavits were ordered to be read as PW-7, PW-8 and PW-9 respectively.
8. When examined under Section 313, Cr. P.C., all the four accused pleaded that they were not even present in the house at Nakodar on the night when Paramjit died and on the other hand, her father and Prem Singh Sarpanch were there. Baldev Singh accused further pleaded that he came to know about the death of Paramjit-deceased next morning when Darshan and Prem Singh PWs advised him to keep mum. The accused did not choose to examine any witness in their defence.
9. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, as stated above, convicted and sentenced Baldev Singh-accused Under Section 304-B, I.P.C. and acquitted him of the charge Under Section 302, I.P.C. and also acquitted rest of the accused of all the charges framed against them. Hence this appeal.
10. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have examined the record with their assistance.
11. The learned State counsel has contended that the trial Court has erred in law and on facts in acquitting the accused Under Section 302, I.P.C. The learned counsel submits that the extra-judicial confession made by the accused-respondents before Satwant Singh (PW-4) inspires confidence and should have been relied upon by the trial Court. It may be noted here that the trial Court has acquitted all the accused for the charge made against them Under Section 302, I.P.C. on the following grounds:-
(1) There is not an iota of evidence on the file to show if Shangara Singh alias Kala, Sohan and Jeeto accused had caused the death of Paramjit-deceased.
(2) The story of extra-judicial confession made by Baldev Singh before PW-4 Satwant Singh seems to be a concocted affair.
(3) The medical evidence does not support the prosecution story about the murder of Paramjit at the hands of the accused.
12. We find force in the reasoning of the trial Court while acquitting all the accused under Section 302, I.P.C.
13. In his alleged confessional statement before Satwant Singh (PW-4), Baldev Singh admitted having caused the death of Paramjit by forcibly pouring insecticides into her mouth by him when his co-accused had held her from her hair and legs. Satwant Singh (PW-4) has not stated that Shangara Singh alias Kala, Sohan and Jeeto accused had made any confessional statement before him. Even Baldev Singh-accused who is alleged to have made an extra-judicial confession before Satwant Singh (PW-4), does not refer to any such statement having been made by the other three accused before Satwant Singh. Thus, the extra-judicial confession made by Baldev Singh is of no consequence so far as the other three accused Shangara Singh alias Kala, Sohan and Jeeto regarding the murder of Paramjit deceased is concerned.
14. The learned trial Court has rightly not placed any reliance on the evidence of Satwant Singh (PW-4). Satwant Singh has admitted in his statement that his village falls within the area of Police Station, Shankot while the accused belonged to Nakodar. It has not been shown that these two places were nearer to each other. It is also not discernible from the evidence on the file that Satwant Singh and Baldev Singh very well known to each other earlier to the occurrence in this case. Satwant Singh (PW-4) has further admitted in his statement at the trial that Baldev Singh accused had met him about a year before he approached him and confessed his guilt. He has further admitted that he did not even know earlier, if Baldev Singh was married. He had never visited the house of Baldev Singh nor Baldev Singh had ever visited his house. It is not shown from the evidence that Baldev Singh-accused had any tempo of his own or that he was an office-bearer of the Tempo Union. Thus, the meeting of Baldev Singh with Satwant Singh (PW-4) in connection with the problems of tempo owners of the union, if any, was not called for nor it was in an ordinary course. This factual position shows that Baldev Singh-accused had no such relations with Satwant Singh (PW-4) that he could take him into confidence to confess his guilt.
15. The prosecution story is that the insecticides had been forcibly poured into the mouth of the deceased; but this story is not corroborated by the medical evidence. Dr. Adarsh Sood (PW-1) who conducted the post-mortem on the dead-body of the deceased, did not find any injury on the mouth of the deceased. In case the insecticides had been forcibly poured into the mouth of the deceased, she was expected to have sustained some sort of injuries on her face in the ensuing scuffle.
16. We thus, do not interfere in the finding of the trial Court vide which all the accused have been acquitted of the charge Under Section 302, I.P.C. The State appeal against the judgment/order, dated 16-7-1988 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar thus, fails and is dismissed.
17. Let us now appreciate the evidence regarding the charge framed against the accused-Baldev Singh under Section 304-B, I.P.C.
18. It has come in the evidence of Darshan Singh PW-2, father of the deceased-Paramjit that she was married to the accused Baldev Singh about six months before her death. Darshan Singh PW has deposed at the trial that two weeks after the marriage of her daughter (Paramjit), he had gone to the house of the accused-Baldev Singh to take her. At that time, all the four accused were present there and they had complained to him that he (Darshan Singh) had given negligible dowry which had put them to shame in their brotherhood. They had also proposed to him that after settling the matter by means of writing, he should take along Paramjit once for all. He (Darshan Singh) returned alone to his village and contacted Prem Singh Sarpanch of his village-panchayat and told him about their talk with him. Later on, he himself and Prem Singh, Sarpanch reached the house of the accused accompanied by Shafi member panchayat of their village. Prem Singh told the accused to keep the girl but all the accused again complained about the inadequacy of dowry and their respect having been lowered on account of that. The accused promised that they would leave the girl at his house on the coming Sunday. However, Baldev Singh-accused had brought the girl to his house two days before the fixed date. He (Baldev Singh) did not cat or drink anything from his (Darshan Singh's) house and returned back. Paramjit stayed at his house for about three months and he had been sending messages to the accused to take her but nobody turned. The accused sent the reply that car rings, finger ring and bangle (kara) of gold should be provided to them and they would take Paramjit to their house only on that condition. He (Darshan Singh) again consulted Prem Singh in the matter and told him about his helplessness. He and Prem Singh again went to the house of the accused at Nakodar and requested them to bring Paramjit to their house. A week thereafter, Baldev Singh came to his house and took Paramjit along to his house. Three or four days before the occurrence, he had gone to the house of the accused and had met her. She told him that it was frequently talked in the house of the accused that she had not brought ear rings, finger ring and Kara and that she would be killed by them. He assured that the accused could not kill her and that he would talk to Panchayat. He then returned to his village and he again talked to Prem Singh, who told him that the following Sunday which Tell on 13th, he (Prem Singh) would accompany him to the house of the accused. However, he came to know on the 12th that Paramjit had expired.
19. PW-3 Prem Singh Sarpanch has supported the version of Darshan Singh (PW-2), father of the deceased so far as the demand of more dowry and the harassment of 'Paramjit-deceased by the accused is concerned. He has stated at the trial that he had accompanied Darshan Singh (PW-2) and had dropped Paramjit-deceased at the house of the accused. He further deposed that he was again to accompany Darshan Singh PW on Sunday which fell on 13-9-1987 to the house of the accused but on 12-9-1987, news about the death of Paramjit was received.
20. Darshan Singh (PW-2) had stated at the trial that he had moved an application mark 'A' to the D.S.P., Nakodar in respect of the demand of the accused for more dowry. We, therefore, find sufficient evidence on the record to show that Paramjit-deceased used to be harassed and treated with cruelty in her matrimonial house by her husband for not bringing sufficient dowry; and demand for more dowry had been made by the accused from deceased-Paramjit.
21. It is an admitted fact that Paramjit died in the house of her in-laws and the cause of her death which has been described by Dr. Adarsh Sood (PW-1), was on account of poisoning as indicated by the report of the Chemical Examiner Ex. PB. Stomach was distended and was sent for analysis to thc Chemical Examiner along with its contents. Small intestine piece was sent for chemcial analysis. Large intestine was distended and a piece was sent for analysis along with its contents. Liver, spleen and kidneys were congested and their pieces were sent for chemical analysis. It is indicated by the report of the Chemical Examiner Ex. PB that an insecticide of the chloro-compound group was found in the contents.
22. It has not been explained by the accused as to how Paramjit died an unnatural death in their house. A suggestion was made to PW-2 Darshan Singh in the cross-examination that Paramjit-deceased had consumed insecticides by mistake which suggestion was refuted by him. There is no evidence on the file that Paramjit had got herself treated immediately before her death through some doctor or she was taking some medicine for any disease or that any container of the medicine or any insecticides etc. was lying near her which could infer that Paramjit-deceased consumed insecticide by mistake as a medicine.
23. Where the death of a woman occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that before death, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by Her husband or any relative of her husband or hi connection with any demand for dowry, such death shall be called a 'dowry death' and such relative or husband shall be deemed to have caused the death.
24. In this case it is an admitted fact that the marriage had taken place between Baldev Singh-accused and Paramjit just about six months before Paramjit died. The accused has not produced any such evidence which could rebut the presumption as stated above.
25. In these circumstances, we do not find any fault with the judgment of the trial Court vide which it had held that the death of Paramjit-deceased occurred on account of poisoning and under abnormal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is found on the evidence on the file that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with demand for more dowry.
26. We do not find any fault with the judgment of the trial Court so far as the other three accused namely Shangara Singh alias Kala, Sohan and Jeeto have been acquitted. It has rightly been held by the trial Court that it was Baldev Singh, the husband of Paramjit deceased who had been demanding more dowry in the form of gold ornaments from her parents. It has come in the evidence of PWs that when Baldev Singh had accompanied Paramjit to her parents house, he showed his annoyance to them in connection with the inadequacy of the dowry inasmuch as he did not eat or drink anything in his in-laws house on his visit to them.
27. In these circumstances, the appeal filed by the husband Baldev Singh stands dismissed and the judgment of the trial Court stands affirmed.
28. Resultantly, both the appeals filed by the State of Punjab as well as by Baldev Singh are dismissed.