Rajiv Sharma, J.—The State has come in appeal against Judgment dated 28.2.2008 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh in Sessions Trial No. 14-S/7 of 2007, whereby respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as ''accused'' for convenience sake), who was charged with and tried for offence under Section 306 IPC, have been acquitted.
2. Case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that deceased Chanda who was the wife of accused Raj Kumar had been married about 5 years back. Accused was residing at Navgaon near Darla Maur and was a tenant of one Sohan Lal (PW-4). On 3.7.2007 at about 6.50 PM, ASI Sohan Lal (PW-12) received information from IGMC Shimla. He deputed HC Santokh Singh to proceed to Shimla on 4.7.2007. ASI Sohan Lal took over the investigation and recorded the statement of the father of the deceased, namely Daya Ram vide Ext. PW-1/A. On the basis of said statement, he prepared Rukka Ext. PW-7/A and sent the same through Constable Ashok Kumar to the Police Station, Darlaghat. FIR Ext. PW-7/B was recorded. Deceased Chanda had died by the time and as such, after preparation of inquest papers, Ext. PW-1/B and Ext. PW-1/C, he sent the dead body for post-mortem. Post-mortem report is Ext. PW-6/B. According to the averments made in the statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C., accused from the inception of marriage had been maltreating his daughter and often used to resort to beatings without any rhyme or reason. Deceased was stated to have even attempted suicide earlier but due to his insistence she had been sent to her matrimonial house. As per the statement of the complainant, on 2.7.2007, about 2-3 guests had come to the house of the accused at Navgaon and he had coerced the deceased Chanda to prepare meals for them. But since their was no ration in the house she could not oblige the demand so made, which resulted in the accused hurling abuses and giving beatings to her. On this, the deceased had bolted herself in the kitchen and after sprinkling kerosene on herself had set herself ablaze. Because of burning she had been shifted to IGMC Shimla on 3.7.2007, where she had died. He came to know about the incident on 3.7.2007 at night that the deceased Chanda had died due to the ill-treatment meted out to her by the accused Raj Kumar. Case property was taken into possession and sent to FSL Junga. Reports of FSL Junga are Ext. PW-12/D and Ext. PW-12/E. Investigation was completed. Challan was put in the Court after completing all the codal formalities.
3. Prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses to prove its case against the accused. Accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He pleaded innocence. Learned trial Court acquitted the accused. Hence, this appeal.
4. Mr. Neeraj K. Sharma, Deputy Advocate General has vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused.
5. Mr. Virender Thakur, Advocate, has supported the judgment dated 28.2.2008.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record carefully.
7. PW-1 Daya Ram is the father of the deceased. He deposed that he had five daughters and two sons. Out of them four daughters had been married. Chanda, the deceased, was fourth daughter and was married to accused Raj Kumar about 5 years back. Accused was residing at Navgaon near Darla Mour. He was tenant of one Sohan Lal. Raj Kumar worked as a contractor. Initially, the relations between the accused and deceased were cordial. But later, accused kept changing his residence and whenever his daughter visited him, she used to complain that the accused is maltreating her. Accused did not use to give ration to the deceased. On 2.7.2007, his daughter had called him at about 9.00 AM and complained that the labour of the accused was pestering her for payments and accused was at rest house Jwalamukhi. She also told that accused had taken payments from the contractor but was not paying to the labourers. He assured her that Raj Kumar would come back and she need not bother herself. Later, when he tried to contact Raj Kumar, he had switched off his mobile. On 3.7.2007, brother of accused informed telephonically at about 2.30 PM that Chanda is admitted at IGMC Shimla on account of burn injuries. Accused initially told him that he was far away and as such could not say as to what had happened to Chanda but since the brother of accused had already told that Chanda was in the hospital, he again contacted the accused over the telephone and it was only third time that accused told him that he was at Shimla and Chanda had sustained burn injuries. Accused told him on 3.7.2007 at 4.00 PM that Chanda was well but, later on, after 15 minutes when he again inquired from the accused, he told that Chanda had passed away. He managed to reach Darlaghat by 7 PM and went to Police Station, Darlaghat. On the next day, they went to Shimla. He was accompanied by his wife, daughters, sons-in-law and his sons. Chanda had died due to burn injuries. Police recorded his statement Ext. PW-1/A. Cremation took place at Shimla. They went to Navgaon, the place where deceased was residing. Case property was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ext. PW-1/E. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he has not given any statement to the police that his daughter had told him on telephone on 2.7.2007 that the labourers were pestering her for payments. He told the police that accused did not use to give ration to the deceased. (But it is not so recorded in the statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C.). He admitted that Raj Kumar had taken Chanda to the Hospital. He had not made any complaint to the police or anybody that the accused did not use to provide ration to the deceased. He also admitted that he has not told the police that the accused had switched off his mobile phone on 3.7.2007.
8. PW-2 Sheetla is the mother of the deceased. She deposed that the deceased used to reside at Navgaon near Darla Mour. They had started living at Navgaon hardly ten days prior to the incident. For about 2 years, accused and the deceased were happy. Thereafter, accused Raj Kumar started harassing and maltreating the deceased. He used to give beatings to the deceased. Her daughter used to complain about his behaviour when she used to come to her parental house. In her cross-examination, she admitted that she has not reported about the bickering between the deceased and the accused to the police, Panchayat or any relative. She also admitted that for two years of marriage, Raj Kumar used to love his wife Chanda.
9. PW-3 Pawan Kumar is the brother of the deceased. According to him, accused used to fight with his sister and harass her at night after 10-11 PM. At 12.00 on 2.7.2007, he had called on the mobile of Raj Kumar to talk to his sister but he informed him that he was at Jwalaji and will return back in the evening. When he tried to contact him in the evening, his mobile was switched off. He tried to contact accused on 3.7.2007 but his phone did not respond. He received a call on 3.7.2007 at 4.00 PM that his sister had expired. He joined his parents at Malokhar and thereafter went to Shimla. They went to Shimla on the same day and by that time, deceased had died. He had seen the dead body.
10. PW-4 Sohan Lal testified that Raj Kumar was his tenant. He had rented two rooms to accused on 2.6.2007. He and his wife along with their son used to reside there. He was in his house on the day of occurrence. On 2.7.2007 at about 10.30 PM, he heard hue and cry. Since he was asleep, he got up and saw the deceased in the lap of accused near the Mandir which was adjacent to his house. Deceased was in flames and had been burnt badly. She was thereafter sent to the hospital in a vehicle. Deceased was talking at that time. She did not say as to by whom she had been burnt. Police visited the spot on 5.7.2007. He saw partially burnt clothes inside the room and some cooked food lying on plates. Police took into possession burnt clothes, a plastic can and match stick and polythene bag. He did not know about the relations of the deceased and accused. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. In his cross-examination he testified that he did not know whether accused used to beat or maltreat the deceased. He did not know whether guests had come to the house of accused on 2.7.2007. He did not know whether there was any ration in the house of accused on 2.7.2007. He did not know that the accused had a fight with deceased for not making food for his guests. There was some food lying on the plates. He could not say whether deceased had committed suicide because of maltreatment meted to her by the accused.
11. PW- 5 Jagan Nath testified that the accused used to live with his wife, son and his brother. On 5.7.2007, police joined him in the investigation and he visited the site of occurrence on said date. In the verandah, beds had been laid and in the kitchen the food was lying in two or three plates and things were scattered here and there. Some burnt clothes and polythene were lying there. Glass over the door was lying broken in the kitchen. Pieces of glass were lying on the floor. One plastic can was also lying which was smelling of kerosene. Articles were taken into possession by the police vide seizure memo Ext. PW-1/E. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. He did not know whether the accused used to give beatings to the deceased or that accused used to maltreat the deceased. He did not know whether 2-3 guests had come on 2.7.2007. He did not know whether accused did not have ration in his house on 2.7.2007. He was not aware whether accused gave beatings to the deceased because she did not prepare meals for his guests. He did not know that for the aforesaid reasons accused poured Kerosene on the deceased and set her ablaze.
12. PW-6 Dr. Sangeet Dhillion has conducted post-mortem examination. According to her, deceased died as a result of ante mortem burn injuries leading to neurogenic shock and due to accumulation of toxins. She issued post-mortem report Ext. PW-6/B.
13. PW-10 Birbal deposed that accused was a contractor. On 2.7.2007, he along with Teg Bahadur and one other labourer whose name he did not recollect had gone to the accused at Darlaghat in Navgaon. He had come for work. Apart from three of them, accused, his wife and children were present in the house. They had reached there at about 4 PM and thereafter, after taking their meals, had gone to village Malethi. Thereafter, on 4th the accused had called them to the hospital at Shimla. They had gone to the hospital at Shimla since wife of accused had been burnt. On 2.7.2007 nothing transpired in his presence. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. He denied the suggestion that they were in the house of accused till late in night. He further denied that accused had asked his wife to prepare the meals. Volunteered that she had prepared food and they had left after having their meals. He denied that there was no ration in the house on that day. He denied that deceased told the accused that there was no ration and as such she could not prepare the meals. He denied that because of said fact, an altercation had ensued between the accused and the deceased. He denied that accused hurled abuses at the deceased and had quarreled with her. His statement was recorded by the police. He denied the portion A to A of his statement Ext. PW-10/A. According to him, no such statement was given by him to the police. He also denied portion B to B of his statement. He had no money due from the accused.
14. PW-11 Teg Bahadur also deposed that he along with Birbal and Suresh Kumar had visited the house of the accused. Accused, his wife and son were present in the house on that day. Three of them had reached the house of the accused at about 4.30 PM and after having their meals, they had left the house of accused. He did not know what transpired thereafter. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. He denied the suggestion that they had got late and stayed in the house of accused. Accused had asked Chanda to prepare meals for them. He did not know that deceased told accused that there was no ration and after that an altercation ensued between accused and deceased and accused hurled abuses to deceased. He denied that they had not taken meal in the house of accused.
15. PW-12 ASI Sohan Lal deposed that the father of the deceased Daya Ram got recorded his statement Ext. PW-1/A at IGMC Shimla on 4.7.2007. He prepared Rukka Ext. PW-7/A, on the basis of which FIR Ext. PW-7/B was registered. Deceased was already dead as such after preparation of inquest report, Exts. PW-1/B and PW-1/C, he sent the dead body for post-mortem examination. Post-mortem report is Ext. PW-6/B. Case property was taken into possession and sent to FSL Junga.
16. According to PW-1, Daya Ram, guests had visited the house of accused. Accused asked his wife to prepare meals. She did not prepare meals since there was no ration and he hurled abuses. Thereafter, she put herself on fire. However, fact of the matter is that PW-10 Birbal and PW-11 Teg Bahadur, have categorically admitted that they had gone to the house of the accused. They had their meals in the house of accused and thereafter they had left the place. They have denied the suggestion that no ration was available and accused hurled abuses at the deceased, which led to the incident. PW-2 Sheetla deposed that accused used to give beatings to the deceased. However, in her cross-examination, she admitted that she has not reported about the bickering between accused and deceased either to the police or to any relative. PW-3 Pawan Kumar has given a new version that deceased was beaten up by the accused at night after 10-11 PM. PW-1 Daya Ram has admitted in his cross-examination that it was the accused who had taken Chanda to the hospital and he has not made any complaint to the police that accused did not provide ration to the deceased. PW-4 Sohan Lal testified that on 2.7.2007, at 10.30 PM he heard cry and visited the spot. He had seen deceased in the lap of accused near the temple. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. He did not know whether accused used to beat or maltreat deceased and whether any guests had come to the house of accused on 2.7.2007. He was not aware whether ration was available in the house or not. PW-5 Jagan Nath, in his cross-examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, after being declared hostile, testified that he did not know whether accused used to give beatings to the deceased or not and whether accused used to maltreat her. He did not know that guests had visited the house of accused on 2.7.2007. PW-1 Daya Ram has deposed in his examination-in-chief that his daughter called him on 2.7.2007 and told him that labour used to ask for the payments. However, it is not so recorded in the statement recorded under Section 154 CrPC. PW-10 Birbal and PW-11 Teg Bahadur deposed that they had left the place after taking meals and they were not aware what happened thereafter.
17. Surprisingly, PW-1 Daya Ram in his examination-in-chief testified that they reached Darlaghat by 7 PM and went to the Police Station, Darlaghat. On the next day, they went to Shimla. When the family came to know that Chanda was admitted in the hospital, they should have gone to the Hospital to look after her instead of going to the Police Station.
18. Prosecution has failed to prove as to what was the proximate cause which compelled the deceased to take her life. There is no material on record to show what were the compelling circumstances created by the accused forcing her to take such an extreme step of ending her own life.
19. Their Lordships of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Bhagwan Das v. Kartar Singh and ors, reported in AIR 2007 SC 2045, have held that harassment of wife by husband or in-laws, per se, does not attract Section 306. Prosecution has to prove somehow more than some avert act attributable to accused which was direct and proximate cause for the commission of suicide. Their Lordships have held as under:
15. In our opinion the view taken by the High Court is correct. It often happens that there are disputes and discords in the matrimonial home and a wife is often harassed by the husband or her in-laws. This, however, in our opinion would not by itself and without something more attract Section 306 IPC read with Section 107 IPC.
16. However, in our opinion mere harassment of wife by husband due to differences per se does not attract Section 306 read with Section 107 IPC, if the wife commits suicide. Hence, we agree with the view taken by the High Court. We, however, make it clear that if the suicide was due to demand of dowry soon before her death then Section 304B IPC may be attracted, whether it is a case of homicide or suicide. Vide Kans Raj v. State of Punjab & Ors. 2000(5) SCC 207, Satvir Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. 2001(8) SCC 633, Smt. Shanti & Anr. v. State of Haryana AIR 1991 SC 1261.
20. In view of the discussion and analysis made herein above, the appeal has no merit and the same is dismissed. Bail bonds of accused are discharged. All pending applications are also disposed of.
