Mehtab S. Gill, J.@mdashBy this common judgment I am disposing of Cr. A.No. 6-SB of 1994 and Cr. Revision No. 157 of 1994, as they arise out of the same judgment dated/order dated 17.12.1993 of the Sessions Judge, Ludhiana whereby he convicted appellants Baljit Singh and Veerpal Kaur u/s Section 498-A I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000, in default, to further undergo RI for four months. They were also convicted u/s 304-B I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Sher Singh father of deceased Paljit Kaur was married to appellant Baljit Singh about 7 months before the occurrence. Appellant Veerpal Kaur is the sister of appellant Baljit Singh. Dalip Singh was the go between. As per F.I.R. Ex. PE, sufficient money was spent on the marriage. Appellants were not satisfied and they started taunting deceased Paljit Kaur that she had not brought motor-cycle Hero Honda in dowry. Paljit Kaur informed her father Sher Singh who informed Dalip Singh about the harassment. Deceased Paljit Kaur kept complaining about the harassment. Sher Singh along with his son Gurmukh Singh and Dalip Singh then again went and asked the appellants not to harass his daughter. Appellants at that time stated that the matter can be settled if a motor-cycle Hero Honda is given to them. This happened about two months before the death of Paljit Kaur which was on 21.9.1991. 3/4 days prior to the occurrence, Sher Singh and his son Gurmukh Singh had gone to the house of the appellants and both the appellants had again insisted for a motor-cycle Hero Honda. Appellant Baljit Singh had also threatened that he would otherwise go in for a second marriage. At this Paljit Kaur became very sad. Sher Singh then came to know that his daughter had consumed some poisonous substance and she had died. Gurmukh Singh and Sher Singh then went to the house of the appellants. After leaving Gurmukh Singh at the place of occurrence, Sher Singh was going to Police Station, Sardulgarh, where he met the policy party at Bus Stand, Sardulgarh and recorded the F.I.R.
3. The prosecution to prove its case, brought into the witness-box Dr. Vijay Mahana PW-1, Sher Singh PW-2 and Dalip Singh PW-3.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has stated that Sher Singh PW-2 in his testimony before the Court has not stated that any demand of dowry was made at the time of marriage. It has come in his statement that a scooter was given to the appellants at the time of the marriage. Since a scooter had been given, the demand for a motor-cycle Hero Honda is not a demand which can be accepted. If the appellants wanted a motor-cycle, they would have at the very outset told Sher Singh PW-2, that instead of a scooter, a motor-cycle be given as the difference of money is hardly Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 4,000/-. There are contradictions in the statements of Sher Singh PW-2 and Dalip Singh PW-3. Sher Singh PW-2 has stated that the went to visit his daughter two months prior to the occurrence and Dalip Singh PW-3 has stated that he went to see Paljit Kaur, five months before the occurrence. In fact, Paljit Kaur was pregnant and she ate eight Rai Chhibers, which grow wild in the fields, Rai Chhibers being tasty and pungent to eat.
5. The most important witness Gurmukh Singh brother of the deceased and son of Sher Singh PW-2 has not been examined. He has been given up by the prosecution as being unnecessary. In fact, he has not been produced because he would have spoken the truth. The distance between the Dhanis of Sher Singh PW-2 and the appellants is 4 to 5 Killas (acres). Both the families were living very close by and would be meeting each other everyday. They were agriculturists. The boundaries of their land also touched each others. No demand was made by appellant Veerpal Kaur for herself as per the statement of Sher Singh PW-2 and Dalip Singh PW-3. Gurmail Singh DW-1 and Jarnail Singh DW-2 have categorically stated that death was due to the eating of Rai Chhibers. Appellants belong to the same village i.e. Village Sangha, which is also the village of the complainant.
6. Learned counsel for the State has argued that death has taken place by consuming Organo Phosphorus after the deceased was maltreated in the house of her in-laws. She was being harassed and a demand of motor-cycle Hero Honda was being made. Sher Singh PW-2 and Dalip Singh PW-3 have proved the case of the prosecution.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and judgment of the trial Court with their assistance.
8. In order to determine whether any offence has been committed or not, it would be appropriate to scan the evidence of Sher Singh PW-2 and Dalip Singh PW-3. The relevant part of the statement of Sher Singh PW-2 is as follows :-
Both the accused used to give taunt to my daughter after the marriage. They were complaining that Hero Honda motor cycle has not been given at the time of marriage.
.... Before the occurrence, I Gurmukh Singh, my son had gone with Dalip Singh to the house of the accused. We went 2 months before the present occurrence..... 3-4 days before the present occurrence, I and Gurmukh Singh had gone to the house of accused once again.
9. These things were said Sher Singh PW-2 in his examination-in-chief. In his cross-examination, he has stated as under :-
The Dhani (residence in field) where I am living is also known as "Sher Singh Dhani". The Dhani where accused live is also known as Shingara Singh Dhani. People live in similar ways in different fields in different Dhanies. The distance of these Dhanies inter se 4-5 killas..... Two months after the marriage, my daughter had complained to me for the first time regarding the maltreatment given to her by the accused. We did not take the matter to the village panchayat at any stage. We did not give any information to the police at any stage that the accused were demanding more dowry. We did not get any person assembled from the Dhani for settlement. I had given a scooter at the time of marriage. After the present occurrence, the same scooter has been transferred in the name of my son Gurmukh Singh. It is correct that the dowry articles had also been returned after the occurrence...... Accused Baljit Singh is only son of his parents. He has 12-13 killas of land. It is fact a that sometime the Rai Chhibber plants grow in the field of their own.
10. He, however, denied the defence suggestion given to him that his daughter had died consuming Rai-Chiibbers and that the admitted that his daughter was pregnant. Dalip Singh stated as under :-
About 5 months before the occurrence Paljit Kaur had made complaint to us and then we had gone to the house of the accused..... Baljit Singh told us that they would keep Paljit Kaur if a Hero Honda was given to them. Veerpal Kaur also reiterated the same demand.
11. This witness did not go again to their house and it is said that 3-4 days before the occurrence, only Sher Singh had gone along with his son. In cross- examination, Dalip Singh PW-3 exceeded his brief and said things, which was never the case of the prosecution and the things which were said by Dalip Singh PW-3 as under :-
Sher Singh used to complain to me about the conduct of the accused after 2-3 or 4 days as my Dhani was also situated at a distance of about one killa from his Dhani. The accused used to turn out Paljit Kaur after beating after 8-10 days and I or somebody else used to accompany Paljit Kaur to leave her in the house of the accused. I had gone 2-4 times to the house of the accused in this connection.
12. From this evidence, it is clear there was no allegation of any demand of dowry made before the marriage.
13. It has come in the evidence of Sher Singh PW-2 that the Dhani (residence) of the appellants and that of Sher Singh PW-2 was hardly at a distance of 4/5 Killas (acres) Further, it has come in the evidence of Dalip Singh PW-3 that his Dhani (residence) was also in that very locality. The Dhanies of Sher Singh PW-2 and the appellants were at a seeing distance. It is not believable that when deceased Paljit Kaur was harassed for the demand of motor-cycle Hero Honda, she did not come to her parents'' house, which was on 4-5 acres away. Sher Singh PW-2 in fact, has stated that he went to the house of Paljit Kaur 3/4 days prior to the occurrence and two months prior to the occurrence. Dalip Singh PW-3 has stated that he went to the deceased''s house 5 months prior to the occurrence. Both the complainant and the appellant party were living so close to each other that they would have come in contact with each other on each and everyday, several times. Both the parties are in the profession of farming. Womenfolk have to go out of their houses to take the meals of the men, who work in the fields. They also help in agricultural work. If Paljit Kaur was being harassed, she would walked out of the house of the appellants and reached the house of her own parents within a few minutes.
14. Harassment on account of dowry was complained by the deceased for the first time, two months after the marriage. Sher Singh PW-2 has stated that he went to the house of the appellants only once in the company of Sher Singh PW-2 and their first visit was two months after the marriage. In the respect, he is contradicted by Dalip Singh PW-3 who has stated that about 5 months before the occurrence, Paljit Kaur had complained to them and then he along with Gurmukh Singh and Sher Singh PW-2 had gone there. Sher Singh PW-2 has stated that they went two months prior to the occurrence and Dalip Singh PW-3 has stated that they went five months prior to the occurrence. Both have contradicted each other.
15. Version of the prosecution is inherently improbable. There is not much difference between the price of a motor-cycle Hero Honda and a scooter. In those days, only a 100 cc. motor cycle was available and the difference of the price between a scooter and a motor-cycle Hero Honda was not much. Therefore, there was no point in demanding a motor cycle after the marriage. Appellant Baljit Singh had been given a scooter at that time. Alternatively, Sher Singh PW-2 could have asked for a motor cycle in place of a scooter. This renders the case of the prosecution doubtful.
16. The alleged harassment or taunting has not been specified. At any rate, the prosecution has not been able to prove the degree and nature of harassment that would compel a person to take her life. The evidence, of the fact that soon before her death the deceased was harassed on account of dowry is not believable. Dalip Singh PW-3, the mediator of the marriage, did not accompany the complainant and his son. It was only Sher Singh PW-2 and his son Gurmukh Singh who allegedly went there, 3-4 days prior to the occurrence. Gurmukh Singh has not been examined and we are left with the statement of Sher Singh PW-2 only, who is the solitary witness of the visit 3-4 days prior to the occurrence. He has stated that both the appellants again raised the demand of a Hero Honda motor cycle. This piece of evidence is not a reliable evidence. No presumption u/s 113 of the Evidence Act can be drawn in favour of the prosecution.
17. Dr. Vijay Mahana PW-1 has stated, that the stomach of the deceased was having semi-digested food, about 500 cc and was congested. He has further stated that small intestines were empty, bladder was also empty. He also does not talk of faecal matter in the gut. This clearly shows that the deceased had gone to ease herself in the field and Rai Chhibbers were taken after she had eased herself and it is thereafter, poison went into her stomach. Doctor PW-1 has stated that the death is more probable, if the position was taken orally. If Rai Chhibbers, which are recently sprayed with organo phosphorus are consumed, it would amount to taking poison orally. The doctor has also admitted that organo phosphorus is absolved (absorbed ?) in the human body through inhaling. Dr. Modi in his Book of Medical Jurisprudence has written about organo phosphorus that "these are absorbed from skin, respiratory, gastrointestinal and circulatory system". The deceased was in an advanced stage of pregnancy. In such a stage, women have a tendency to eat pungent food, Rai chhibber is one of such things. Deceased was otherwise happily married and was expecting a child. She would be the last person to commit suicide under the conditions as spelt out by the complainant. It was in fact an accidental death. The evidence is also post occurrence evidence and is coming from highly interested witnesses. No panchayat or other independent person was ever associated. Dhanies of the complainant and appellants are situated nearby. The deceased could easily walk to her parents house. As per the evidence of Sher Singh PW-2, he only visited her house two times during these 7 months. This by itself shows that the girl was living happily. Appellant No. 2 Verrpal Kaur was an unmarried girl at that time. There was no point for her to raise any such demand and it cannot be said that she was in a position even to harass her brother''s wife. This shows that the prosecution witnesses are not telling the truth. Since their own daughter has died, they want to malign the unmarried daughter belonging to the family of the in-laws of the deceased. Not a word has been said by Sher Singh PW-2 or Dalip Singh PW-3 against the mother or father of the appellants.
18. The prosecution case is highly doubtful, the benefit of which goes to the accused.
Appeal is allowed. Appellants are acquitted of the charges framed against them. Impugned judgment dated 17.12.1993 is set aside.
