* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 06.11.2009
% Date of decision: 25.11.2009
+ Crl. A. No.87 of 1996
THE STATE OF DELHI ...APPELLANT
Through: Mr. Sunil Sharma, Advocate.
Versus
DAL CHAND & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS
Through: Mr. Avninder Singh, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BHARIHOKE
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers
may be allowed to see the judgment? No
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be
reported in the Digest? No
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
1. The respondents/accused were charged with offences under Sections 498-A/304B read with Section 34 of the IPC for causing dowry death of the deceased, Hemlata, but the trial resulted in a judgement of acquittal dated 8.2.1996. The State aggrieved by the said order of acquittal preferred the present appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 20.7.1992 at about 9:00 a.m., Head Constable Amar Singh No.55 PCR conveyed a message on wireless to the Police Station Dabri that one lady has set herself and a girl aged 2 ½ years on fire at RZ- _____________________________________________________________________________________________ CRL. A. No.87 of 1996 Page 1 of 7 A-23, West Sagarpur and that the lady has expired and PCR van was removing her to the hospital. The information was duly recorded in the daily diary registered at Entry No.10A and the copy of the DD report was entrusted to S.I. Mukhtiar Singh, PW-16, for verification. S.I. Mukhtiar Singh, PW-16, and Constable Laxman Prasad, PW-11, reached the spot and found the dead body of Hemlata, the deceased wife, in the burnt condition on the first floor of the house. The police was also informed that the child Karuna had been removed to Safdarjung Hospital by Head Constable Amar Singh, PW-10, but had also expired. The statement of the father of the deceased (Exhibit PW-1/A), Govardhan Lal, PW-1, was recorded by the SDM, H.C. Gaur, PW-12. In terms of the said statement the deceased was married to Dal Chand on 16.5.1989. There was no demand of dowry at the time of marriage but subsequently after a period of six (6) months dowry demand is stated to have been made on the deceased and harassment caused to her. The deceased had even come back to her father's place about 6 to 7 months back but thereafter went back to the matrimonial home on assurance by respectable neighbours. PW-1 received information that his daughter had died at about 1/1:30 p.m. on 20.7.1992.
3. The statement of Govardhan Lal (Exhibit PW-1/A) was sent to the police station with the endorsement of the Investigating Officer and formal F.I.R. (Exhibit PW-3/B) was registered.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ CRL. A. No.87 of 1996 Page 2 of 7
4. The investigation was carried out by S.I. Mukhtiar Singh, PW-16 along with Constable Laxman Prasad, PW-11. They found the door of the room in a broken condition. The body of the deceased was sent for postmortem. The crime team had taken photographs of the scene and seized items found at the spot. The husband of the deceased and his parents were all charged as accused, who pleaded not guilty and thus claimed trial.
5. The prosecution produced a number of witnesses, but in order to establish the charge, the testimonies of the parents and brother of the deceased is what was the bedrock of the case. PW-1, the father of the deceased, and PW-2, the mother of the deceased, deposed almost in an identical fashion, setting forth the same story which was recorded in exhibit PW-1/A. The brother of the deceased, PW-4, had stated that after about six (6) months of marriage the deceased had informed his wife that her husband used to beat her for insufficient dowry and that when he had gone to meet his sister about 10/11 months after the marriage of the deceased, he had been prevented from doing so. The brother never had a direct conversation with the deceased. Insofar as the scene of crime is concerned both PW-1 & PW-4 have deposed that when they reached the spot they found the dead body of the deceased in burnt condition with her hands tied and an iron rod inserted in her mouth. This assertion is contrary to the testimonies of PW-11 and PW-16 apart from other _____________________________________________________________________________________________ CRL. A. No.87 of 1996 Page 3 of 7 witnesses. The medical evidence of the postmortem shows that it is the burns which have caused the death of both the deceased.
6. The defence, in support of their case, have examined three witnesses including the brother of the husband of the deceased. It emerges from his testimony (DW-1) that the deceased and her husband used to stay separately on the first floor.
7. The aforesaid facts show that some of the ingredients of Section 304 B of the IPC are satisfied inasmuch as the death of the deceased was caused by burns other than in normal circumstances and within seven (7) years of marriage. The question, however, remains as to whether the testimony on record can establish that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment, which cruelty and harassment was in connection with demand of dowry and such demand had been made soon before the death.
8. It may be noticed that the death occurred in a room which was locked from inside and the door had to be broken by the neighbour, DW-3. The surrounding circumstances, thus, clearly show that it is a case of suicide. In view thereof, insofar as the aspect of cruelty and demand of dowry is concerned, the testimony of the parents and the brother of the deceased become material. The testimony of the brother of the deceased, PW-4, is to a large extent hearsay based on what he claims was told by the deceased to his wife. The testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2 have a _____________________________________________________________________________________________ CRL. A. No.87 of 1996 Page 4 of 7 number of discrepancies and contradictions. It is the own case of PW-1 that at the time of marriage no demand of dowry was made nor was any demand raised even soon thereafter. The allegation is of the first demand being raised only after about six (6) months. No specific allegation has been made whether any goods were demanded or the money and if so to what extent. It appears that there were some strains in the relationship between the deceased and her husband, which may have caused the deceased to come and stay with her parents but she went back to the husband. The first testimony of PW-1 was recorded before the SDM. There were contradictions in the testimonies recorded before the SDM and in Court. PW- 1 claims that he does not know what was recorded by the SDM. Same is the position with other two material witnesses. Thus, one story is narrated to the SDM while an altered story is recorded in Court. The witnesses themselves cast a doubt over the statements made to the SDM.
9. The probity of a witness is verified by his/her consistent and true testimony. The manner in which the dead body was found as narrated by PW-1 and PW-4 before the trial court is quite different from what is narrated by the police witnesses. The allegation is made that the hands of the dead body were tied and there was an iron rod inserted in the mouth of the deceased. The suggestion appears to be that it is a case of homicide and not suicide to rope in the _____________________________________________________________________________________________ CRL. A. No.87 of 1996 Page 5 of 7 accused. The first witness to reach the site had completely belied these allegations. Thus, the very probity of these witnesses comes into a doubt. It is not only a case where there is an element of exaggeration by the grieving immediate relatives of the deceased, but the grievance appears to be to such an extent that a colour of homicide is sought to be given to a case of suicide.
10. It is these aspects which have weighed with the trial court while acquitting the accused. The provisions of Section 304B of the IPC would be attracted when both the ingredients of cruelty or harassment are coupled with their being connected to the demand of dowry. The testimonies of the parents and the brother are not reliable and no independent witness has been examined, even though respectable neighbours had stepped in to sort out the problem between the deceased and her husband.
11. Another interesting aspect is the testimony of PW-7, Badri Prasad. The brother of Badri Prasad is married to the sister of the deceased. The said witness has deposed that they belong to Barua Samaj a Nomadic Tribe and there is no custom of either giving or taking dowry in this tribe. This is another fact which creates a doubt on the testimonies of PW-1, PW-2 & PW-4 insofar as the demand of dowry is concerned. It, thus, does appear as if the strains of the marriage of the deceased with her husband are sought to be given a colour of dowry death and that too suggesting homicide in a case of suicide.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ CRL. A. No.87 of 1996 Page 6 of 7
12. Dal Chand, the husband, used to work in Embassy as also his father. In the statement made under Section 313 Cr.P.C. he admits to there being some quarrel between him and his wife over food when he slapped the deceased and went away to duty along with his father. It is when they had reported for duty that DW-1 had informed them about the demise of the deceased.
13. The appeal being one against acquittal, due weightage has to be given to the views of the trial judge as to the credibility of the witnesses and the approach of the appellate court to proceed with caution to upset the findings of the trial judge who has the benefit of recording the evidence. If the said principles are applied to the impugned judgement and the testimonies of key witnesses perused, this Court cannot come to a different conclusion than that which has been arrived at by the trial court.
14. We find no infirmity in the impugned judgement of acquittal and dismiss the appeal.
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
NOVEMBER 25, 2009 AJIT BHARIHOKE, J. b'nesh
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ CRL. A. No.87 of 1996 Page 7 of 7