Crl. Appeal No.189-SB of 1996 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No.189-SB of 1996
Date of Decision: 9 - 1 - 2009
Chiranji Lal and another ....Appellants
v.
State of Haryana ....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
***
Present: Mr.A.S.Virk, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr.S.S.Mor, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
***
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J.
The present appeal has been preferred by Chiranji Lal son of
Layak Ram and his wife Smt.Phoola Devi. During the pendency of appeal,
Chiranji Lal is stated to have expired on 10.11.2003. Report regarding his
death has been submitted. Therefore, appeal qua Chiranji Lal abates.
The present appeal survives only qua Phoola Devi.
FIR No.193 dated 16.8.1994 was registered at Police Station
Bilaspur under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 406 IPC. Chiranji Lal along
with his wife Phoola Devi, sons Jai Chand, Jaswant Lal alias Lala and
daughter Saroj were tried by the Court of Sessions Judge, Gurgaon in the
above said FIR. In the above said FIR, daughter-in-law of Chiranji Lal
Crl. Appeal No.189-SB of 1996 [2]
Smt.Ram Bhateri had died an unnatural death on 16.8.1994.
Smt.Ram Bhateri daughter of Narain Singh was married in
June, 1989 to Jai Chand son of Chiranji Lal, who at that time was deployed
in the Armed Forces. It was stated in the FIR that sufficient dowry was
given at the time of marriage. Smt.Ram Bhateri according to the
complainant was maltreated and given beatings by family members of
Chiranji Lal i.e. five accused named above in the FIR. It is stated that
family of Chiranji Lal had a grievance that insufficient dowry was given at
the time of marriage. They were demanding scooter and fridge. It was told
that on failure to comply with the demand, Jai Chand would be remarried.
Jai Chand came on annual leave from the Army and Ram Bhateri came from
her father’s place to join him at his native place. On 2.7.1994 Jai Chand
returned to place of his posting. On 8.8.1994, in order to celebrate Teej
festival, Narender nephew of Narain Singh along with maternal uncle
Aflatoon visited Ram Bhateri who requested for giving further articles of
dowry. On 16.8.1994 Ram Bhateri’s uncle Ramesh Kumar was informed by
Rampal and Suresh regarding serious condition of Ram Bhateri as she was
put on fire by her in-laws. Ramesh Kumar and Aflatoon reached village
Baganki and found Ram Bhateri lying unconscious with burn injuries. She
was brought to Civil Hospital, Gurgaon where she was declared dead.
Report was lodged by Ramesh Kumar uncle of Ram Bhateri. The matter
was investigated. Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted holding
accused guilty for offense under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 and 406 IPC.
Prosecution examined Narain Singh father of Ram Bhateri as
PW-11, Ramesh Kumar uncle of Ram Bhateri was examined as PW-9,
Narender brother of Ram Bhateri appeared as PW-10. They stated before
Crl. Appeal No.189-SB of 1996 [3]
the Court regarding maltreatment and demand of dowry. Prosecution had
also examined Dr.R.N.Yadav, Dr.Rekha Yadav to prove that deceased Ram
Bhateri had died due to unnatural death due to 85 per cent burn injuries.
Post-mortem report Ex.PA was proved. Police officials were examined to
prove the investigation. After the conclusion of prosecution evidence, all
incriminating circumstances were put to accused in the statement under
Section 313 Cr.P.C..
The learned trial Court acquitted Saroj and Jaswant Lal alias
Lala as they were less than 18 years and 21 years respectively. They being
un-married sister and brother of husband of Ram Bhateri were given benefit
of doubt. The Court further held that there were no allegations against Jai
Chand husband, rather inference was drawn that there was love and
affection between Jai Chand and his wife Ram Bhateri. Therefore, Jai
Chand was also acquitted. The Court further held that there was no demand
soon before the un-natural death of Ram Bhateri. Therefore, Chiranji Lal
and Phoola Devi were also acquitted under Section 304-B IPC. The
judgment of acquittal for the offence under Section 304-B IPC was
pronounced on 13.2.1996. No appeal against acquittal has been preferred
by the State. Acquittal of Saroj, Jaswant Lal alias Lala and Jai Chand has
attained finality. However, trial Court had convicted and sentenced Chiranji
Lal and Phoola Devi to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of
Rs.5,000/- for offence under Section 498-A IPC and had ordered that in
default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment
for six months.
Since Chiranji Lal had expired and appeal stand abated qua him
as stated earlier, the present appeal subsists only qua Phoola Devi.
Crl. Appeal No.189-SB of 1996 [4]
Counsel for appellant Phoola Devi has stated that he is not in a
position to assail conviction of Phoola Devi. He has submitted that Phoola
Devi is now aged about 75 years. She has already undergone 5 months 22
days of sentence. It has been prayed that taking into consideration, the old
age and the fact that the occurrence took place on 16.8.1994 and the
appellant had suffered a protected trial for more than 14 years, appellant be
not sent behind the bars.
I find merit in the submission made by counsel for the
appellant. Taking into consideration old age and the protected trial, the
sentence awarded to appellant Phoola Devi under Section 498-A is reduced
to the period already undergone i.e. 5 months and 22 days but the fine is
enhanced to Rs.20,000/-. The amount of fine so deposited, shall be
disbursed to the parents of deceased Ram Bhateri. Non deposit of the fine,
shall dis-entitle the appellant from the relief of reduction of sentence.
For the aforesaid reasons, except for the modification in
sentence as noticed above, the present appeal is dismissed.
( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA )
January 9, 2009 JUDGE
RC