{"id":178820,"date":"2009-02-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009"},"modified":"2018-02-28T09:06:09","modified_gmt":"2018-02-28T03:36:09","slug":"state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009<\/div>\n
                 Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and        [1]\n                 Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994\n\n IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH.\n\n\n               Criminal Appeal No.436 DBA of 1994\n\n      State of Haryana                        .....Appellant\n                                 Vs.\n      Harnand and another                     .....Respondents.\n\n                           AND\n\n               Criminal Appeal No.124 SB of 1994\n\n      Rajbir and another                     ......Appellants\n                                Vs.\n      State of Haryana                       ......Respondent\n\n                                                   Date of decision: 20.2.2009\n\n\nCORAM:         HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH.\n               HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY.\n\nPresent:       Ms.Naveen Malik, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana,\n               for the State.\n               Mr.S.K.Rana, Advocate for Harnand and Krishna\n               respondents in Crl.Appeal No. 436 DB A of 1994\n               and for Rajbir and Parkasho appellants in Crl.\n               Appeal No.124 SB of 1994.\n\n                                 *****\n\nDAYA CHAUDHARY, J.\n<\/pre>\n
               Both the appeals arise out of same judgment are being disposed<\/p>\n
of together.\n<\/p>\n
               Crl. Appeal No.436 DBA of 1994 has been filed by State of<\/p>\n
Haryana for setting aside the judgment dated 31.1.1994 passed by Addl.<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, whereby Harnand and Smt.Krishna accused have<\/p>\n
been acquitted of the charges for offence under Sections 304-B and 498-A<\/p>\n
IPC, whereas Crl.Appeal No.124 SB of 1994 has been filed by Rajbir and<\/p>\n
Smt. Parkasho alias Guddi accused-appellants,         whereby they have been<\/p>\n
convicted for offence under Sections 304B and 498-A IPC and sentenced to
\n                Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and     [2]
\n               Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
undergo RI for 7 years each for offence under Section 304-B IPC and to<\/p>\n
undergo RI for 2 years for offence under Section 498-A and to pay a fine of<\/p>\n
Rs.500\/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were further directed to<\/p>\n
undergo RI for a period of three months each. Both the sentences were<\/p>\n
directed to run concurrently.\n<\/p>\n
            Briefly, the facts of the prosecution case are that marriage<\/p>\n
between Raj Kala (since deceased) and Rajbir accused-appellant            was<\/p>\n
solemnized on 29.9.1990. Ram Kumar complainant, who is father of Raj<\/p>\n
Kala, spent money in the marriage as per his capacity but the in-laws of Raj<\/p>\n
Kala were never satisfied with the dowry given at the time of marriage. A<\/p>\n
demand of scooter and cash amount of Rs.20-25 thousand was made by the<\/p>\n
in-laws, which was narrated by Raj Kala to her parents at the time of her<\/p>\n
visit on the occasion of ‘Teej’ festival. It was also told by Raj Kala to her<\/p>\n
parents that if the said demand was not fulfilled by her parents, she would be<\/p>\n
done to death. Raj Kala was sent back to her in-laws house by the parents.<\/p>\n
             On 13.9.1991, Raj Kala was found unconscious in the cotton<\/p>\n
fields.Froth was coming out from her mouth as some poisonous substance<\/p>\n
was allegedly administered to her. She was brought to the hospital, where<\/p>\n
she was declared dead. Post mortem examination was conducted. Viscera<\/p>\n
was sent to the Chemical Examiner. Ram Kumar, father of Raj Kala, lodged<\/p>\n
a complaint with the police on 16.9.1991, on the basis of which formal FIR<\/p>\n
No. 222 of 16.9.1991 (Exhibit PG\/1)        was registered for offence under<\/p>\n
Sections 304-B\/34 IPC at Police Station Sadar Bhiwani against the accused<\/p>\n
persons who were arrested. After completion of investigation and other<\/p>\n
formalities, the challan was presented in the Court of Ilaka Magistrate. The<\/p>\n
case was committed to the Court of Sessions by Additional Chief Judicial
\n                  Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and   [3]
\n                 Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
Magistrate, Bhiwani vide order dated 20.11.1991. Copies of challan were<\/p>\n
supplied to accused under Section 207 Cr.P.C. They were charge-sheeted<\/p>\n
under sections 304-B and 498-A IPC to which they did not plead guilty and<\/p>\n
claimed trial.\n<\/p>\n
             In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined Om Parkash<\/p>\n
Patwari as       PW-1 who proved the site plan Exhibit PA; Pirthvi Singh<\/p>\n
Photographer as PW-2 who proved photographs Exhibits P1 to P3 and their<\/p>\n
negatives as Exhibits P4 to P6; SI Inder Singh as PW-3, who prepared<\/p>\n
report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.; ASI Lachhman Singh as PW-4            who<\/p>\n
proved the inquest report Exhibit PE; Head Constable Satbir Singh as PW-5<\/p>\n
who proved Exhibit P-7 a list of Kanyadan which was taken into possession<\/p>\n
by police vide Memo Ex.PF; Ram Kumar, father of Raj Kala (deceased),<\/p>\n
was examined as           PW-6 and supported the prosecution version;<\/p>\n
Dr.S.C.Aggarwal,       Medical     Officer,whoconducted    the   post-mortem<\/p>\n
examination on the dead-body of Raj Kala appeared as PW-7; Smt. Sama<\/p>\n
Kaur,   mother of Raj Kala deceased, supported the prosecution version<\/p>\n
appeared as PW-8 and ASI Maha Singh, Investigating Officer of this case,<\/p>\n
proved the       formal FIR Exhibit PG\/1 recorded by MHC Satbir Singh,<\/p>\n
appeared as PW-9.\n<\/p>\n
             Statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr,.P.C. were<\/p>\n
recorded, to which, they denied the allegations of the prosecution and<\/p>\n
pleaded innocence. In defence evidence, the accused produced Hari Kishan<\/p>\n
as DW-1 and Harphul Singh as DW-2.\n<\/p>\n
             Mr.S.K.Rana,learned counsel appearing for accused-appellants,<\/p>\n
argued that there is delay of three days in lodging the FIR as the alleged<\/p>\n
occurrence took place on 13.9.1991. Raj Kala was taken to hospital for
\n               Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and     [4]
\n              Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
treatment and died there and the FIR was lodged on 16.9.1991 at about 4.30<\/p>\n
p.m. It is emphasized that this long unexplained delay in lodging the first<\/p>\n
information report creates a serious doubt about the truthfulness and<\/p>\n
credibility of the prosecution case. It is also argued that PW-6 Ram Kumar<\/p>\n
(complainant) and PW-8 Sama Kaur are parents of deceased Raj Kala and<\/p>\n
despite giving intimation to them on 13.9.1991 itself, nobody turned up from<\/p>\n
their side. It has also come in evidence that the complainant remained in<\/p>\n
village Lohani throughout on 15.9.1991 and the FIR was registered on<\/p>\n
16.9.1991 and that too at about 4.30 p.m. The delay in lodging the FIR has<\/p>\n
remained unexplained throughout. It was also argued that the prosecution<\/p>\n
story was silent with regard to time, place and the manner in which Raj<\/p>\n
Kala was harassed and humiliated by the accused persons. There is nothing<\/p>\n
in the evidence of the prosecution to show that the deceased was subjected<\/p>\n
to cruelty or harassment on account of dowry just before her death. As per<\/p>\n
medical evidence, viz. post-mortem report conducted by Dr.S.C.Aggarwal<\/p>\n
PW-7, no injury was found on the person of deceased Raj Kala. She<\/p>\n
consumed poisonous substance due to fear of her having illicit relation with<\/p>\n
one Rejender son of Ram Kishan. It is also the case of the accused-appellants<\/p>\n
that Rajender was reprimanded by Hari Kishan DW-1 in the presence of<\/p>\n
others and was warned to behave properly in future but, despite that, the<\/p>\n
extra marital relationship continued, and due to fear, the deceased might<\/p>\n
have consumed poisonous substance. It is also contended that Rajbir,<\/p>\n
husband of Raj Kala, was away to Bihar at the time of occurrence and the<\/p>\n
best possible medical aid was given to the deceased.<\/p>\n
             It has further been argued that the conduct of the accused party<\/p>\n
was bona fide from the very inception and even on the day of occurrence
\n               Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and     [5]
\n              Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
itself. It is an admitted case of Sama Kaur PW-8, that one person from<\/p>\n
village Lohani came to her village Indiwali and     informed her about the<\/p>\n
death of Raj Kalan and also told that Raj Kala was in the hospital. Despite<\/p>\n
acquiring that knowledge, neither the mother nor the father of the deceased<\/p>\n
reached in the hospital on that very day and they reached there on the next<\/p>\n
day, i.e. 14.9.1991. They remained there throughout on 15.9.1991 and the<\/p>\n
FIR was lodged on 16.9.1991, that too at 4.30 p.m. It is also the case of the<\/p>\n
accused-appellants that allegations of demand of dowry and cruelty, as<\/p>\n
projected by complainant Ram Kumar PW-6, are totally untrustworthy and<\/p>\n
co-accused Harnand and Smt. Krishna on the same set of allegations have<\/p>\n
been acquitted by the trial Court. The reasoning of acquittal adopted by the<\/p>\n
trial Court is lawful and squarely fortified by the evidence available on<\/p>\n
record. It has been contended that the case of the accused-appellants has<\/p>\n
further been supported by medical evidence as there was no mark of struggle<\/p>\n
and injury on the person of deceased Raj Kala and possibility of pouring of<\/p>\n
poisonous substance in the mouth of the deceased forcibly,         cannot be<\/p>\n
believed as there is no direct evidence available on the record showing<\/p>\n
participation of any of the accused in the commission of crime. There is<\/p>\n
only a presumption attached to Section 304 B IPC which has been pressed<\/p>\n
into service in view of unnatural death of Raj Kalan.           Moreover, no<\/p>\n
incriminating evidence has been put to the accused in their statements<\/p>\n
recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the evidence so put, cannot be relied<\/p>\n
upon while convicting and sentencing the accused persons.<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel for the accused-appellants next contended that<\/p>\n
the trial Court has   taken into consideration the general allegations of<\/p>\n
demand of dowry without there being any specific attribution to any of the
\n               Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and      [6]
\n              Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
accused persons in respect of time, place and the manner in which the<\/p>\n
alleged demand was ever raised by accused-appellants. The prosecution has<\/p>\n
totally failed to prove the basic ingredients of dowry death and further the<\/p>\n
fact that the deceased was ever subjected to cruelty or          harassment on<\/p>\n
account of demand of dowry just before her death.\n<\/p>\n
            Ms. Naveen Malik, learned Additional Advocate General,<\/p>\n
appearing for the State, opposing the submissions raised by the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the accused-appellants, has argued      that the trial Court has<\/p>\n
wrongly acquitted Harnand and Krishna accused and has rightly awarded<\/p>\n
the sentence to other co-accused, namely, Rajbir and Smt.Parkasho alias<\/p>\n
Guddi as the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case against them.<\/p>\n
There is sufficient and cogent evidence on the file to convict the accused as<\/p>\n
Ram Kumar, father of Raj Kala, appearing as PW-6 and Sama Kaur, mother<\/p>\n
of deceased appearing as PW-8 have stated consistently that when Raj Kala<\/p>\n
visited their house on the occasion of Teej festival, she told them about mal-<\/p>\n
treatment and specific demand with regard to scooter, colour TV and cash<\/p>\n
amount of Rs.20-25 thousands       by accused persons. The deceased was<\/p>\n
assured by her parents to meet out their demand and on this assurance, she<\/p>\n
was sent back to her in-laws’ house. It is also clear from the statement of<\/p>\n
Sama Kaur PW-8 that deceased Raj Kala told her that in case the demand<\/p>\n
was not fulfilled, she would be done to death by the accused persons. It has<\/p>\n
further been contended by the State counsel that trial Court has totally<\/p>\n
ignored the testimony of the father as well as mother of deceased Raj Kala.<\/p>\n
ASI Maha Singh PW-9 has also asserted that as per investigation, Raj Kala<\/p>\n
died by taking poisonous substance as a result of cruelty on account of<\/p>\n
dowry death. Presumption of Section 113 B of the Evidence Act has been
\n               Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and     [7]
\n              Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
relied by the State counsel. Moreover, the case of the deceased is covered<\/p>\n
under the parameters of Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and provisions of<\/p>\n
Section 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code as the death of Raj Kala<\/p>\n
took place within 7 years of her marriage and if it is a case of taking<\/p>\n
poisonous substance by the deceased, i.e. also due to the compelling<\/p>\n
circumstances created by the accused persons by giving mental and physical<\/p>\n
torture and harassment, which resulted into her death.<\/p>\n
            We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for parties and<\/p>\n
have very carefully scanned the evidence on record.<\/p>\n
            There is no evidence on record to show that Raj Kala was<\/p>\n
subjected to any cruelty or harassment before her death as it is apparent<\/p>\n
from the statements of PW6 Ram Kumar and PW7 Sama Kaur. There is one<\/p>\n
reference that deceased Raj Kala went to her parent’s house on the occasion<\/p>\n
of Teej and told them that her in-laws were harassing her for demand of<\/p>\n
dowry. There is nothing on the record to establish that the deceased was<\/p>\n
subjected to any cruelty or harassment by her in-laws as it has come on<\/p>\n
record that mother-in-law was residing separately, whereas husband of the<\/p>\n
deceased was also away to Bihar as he was working as cleaner on a truck.<\/p>\n
Accused Rajbir has admitted in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that<\/p>\n
at the time of occurrence, he was not in the house as he was away to Bihar<\/p>\n
and working as cleaner on a truck.\n<\/p>\n
            The whole case of the prosecution rests on the statement of PW6<\/p>\n
Ram Kumar (father) and PW8 Sama Kaur (mother) of Raj Kala deceased as<\/p>\n
they have stated in their statements that the deceased came to their house on<\/p>\n
the occasion of Teej and she told them that her in-laws were demanding<\/p>\n
dowry and if the demand was not fulfilled, she would be done to death.\n<\/p>\n
               Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and      [8]
\n              Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
             The deceased died on 13th September, 1991 whereas the FIR<\/p>\n
was lodged on 16th September, 1991 at about 4.30 p.m. and the delay of<\/p>\n
three days in lodging the FIR creates a serious doubt about the truthfulness<\/p>\n
and credibility of the prosecution case. PW-6 Ram Kumar, father of the<\/p>\n
deceased, stated in his statement that he reached Bhiwani at about 8.30 or<\/p>\n
9.00 p.m. in spite of the fact that he was made aware of the incident on 14th<\/p>\n
September, 1991. It is also clear from the statement of Ram Kumar (PW6)<\/p>\n
that he stayed there on 15th September, 1991 and no explanation whatsoever<\/p>\n
for reporting the matter to the police has come on record as to why he took 3<\/p>\n
days in lodging the FIR. The FIR was lodged on 16th September, 1991 at<\/p>\n
about 4.30 p.m.<\/p>\n
            From careful perusal of the statements of the witnesses, it is<\/p>\n
clear that there is nothing in the complaint or in the statements of witnesses<\/p>\n
that accused-appellants used to demand dowry and in what manner the<\/p>\n
deceased was humiliated and harassed. In absence of any specific allegation<\/p>\n
regarding harassment and cruelty caused to the deceased, the accused-<\/p>\n
appellants cannot be connected with the offence. Moreover, mother-in-law<\/p>\n
of the deceased was residing separately and the husband was also away to<\/p>\n
Bihar and working there as cleaner on a truck.\n<\/p>\n
            Now, after going through the contentions of both sides, we have<\/p>\n
to see whether a case under Section 304 B IPC is made out or not.<\/p>\n
                  Section 304-B IPC reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
                  “304-B. Dowry death.-(1) Where the death of a woman is<\/p>\n
                  caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise<\/p>\n
                  than under normal circumstances within seven years of<\/p>\n
                  her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death
\n               Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and     [9]
\n              Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
                  she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband<\/p>\n
                  or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with,<\/p>\n
                  any demand for dowry, such death shall be called “dowry<\/p>\n
                  death” , and such husband or relative shall be deemed to<\/p>\n
                  have caused her death.\n<\/p>\n
                  Explanation. – For the purpose of this sub-section,<\/p>\n
                  “dowry” shall have the same meaning as in section 2 of<\/p>\n
                  the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.\n<\/p>\n
                  (2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with<\/p>\n
                  imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than<\/p>\n
                  seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for<\/p>\n
                  life.”\n<\/p>\n
      Section 304B IPC is applicable, if it is established that soon before<\/p>\n
the death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her<\/p>\n
husband or any of his relative; for or in connection with any demand of<\/p>\n
dowry, such death shall be called “dowry death”, and such husband or<\/p>\n
relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. The Parliament has also<\/p>\n
inserted Section 113 B IPC by Act No. 43 of 1986 with effect from 1.5.1986,<\/p>\n
which reads as under:-\n<\/p>\n
                           “113-B-Presumption as to dowry death.- When the<\/p>\n
                           question is whether a person has committed the<\/p>\n
                           dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon<\/p>\n
                           before her death such woman had been subjected by<\/p>\n
                           such person to cruelty or harassment   for, or in<\/p>\n
                           connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court<\/p>\n
                           shall presume that such person had caused the
\n               Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and    [10]
\n               Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
                        dowry death.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                        Explanation – For the purpose of this section,<\/p>\n
                        “dowry death” , shall have the same meaning as in<\/p>\n
                        Section 304-B IPC.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            From the conjoint reading of Section 304 B IPC and Section<\/p>\n
113-B of the Indian Evidence Act, it is apparent that a presumption arising<\/p>\n
thereunder will operate if the prosecution is able to establish the<\/p>\n
circumstances as set out in Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code.<\/p>\n
         The ingredients of the aforementioned provisions are:<\/p>\n
       (1)That the death of the woman caused by any burns or bodily injury<\/p>\n
       or in some circumstances which is not normal; (2) Such death occurs<\/p>\n
       within 7 years from the date of her marriage: (3) That the victim was<\/p>\n
       subjected or cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of<\/p>\n
       her husband; (4) such cruelty or harassment should be for or in<\/p>\n
       connection with demand of dowry; and (5) it is established that such<\/p>\n
       cruelty and harassment was made soon before her death.”<\/p>\n
            In the case of unnatural death of a married woman as in a case of<\/p>\n
this nature, the husband could be prosecuted under Sections 302 and 306<\/p>\n
IPC. The distinction as regards commission of an offence under one or the<\/p>\n
other provisions as mentioned hereinbefore came up for consideration before<\/p>\n
Hon’ble the Apex Court in Satvir Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab and<\/p>\n
another, 2001 (4) RCR (Crl.) 355 (SC) : [(2001) 8 SCC 633], wherein it<\/p>\n
was held:\n<\/p>\n
  Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and       [11]
\n  Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
“Thus, there are three occasions related to dowry. One is before<\/p>\n
the marriage, second is at the time of marriage and the third is<\/p>\n
“at any time” after the marriage. The third occasion may appear<\/p>\n
to be an unending period. But the crucial words are ” in<\/p>\n
connection with the marriage of the said parties”. This means<\/p>\n
that giving or agreeing to give any property or valuable security<\/p>\n
on any of the above three stages should have been in connection<\/p>\n
with the marriage of the parties. There can be many other<\/p>\n
instances for payment of money or giving property as between<\/p>\n
the spouses.     For example, some customary payments in<\/p>\n
connection with birth of a child or other ceremonies are<\/p>\n
prevalent in different societies. Such payments are not<\/p>\n
enveloped within the ambit of ” dowry” . Hence the dowry<\/p>\n
mentioned in Section 304B should be any property or valuable<\/p>\n
security given or agreed to be given in connection with the<\/p>\n
marriage.\n<\/p>\n
It is not enough that harassment or cruelty was caused to the<\/p>\n
woman with a demand for dowry at some time, if Section 304 B<\/p>\n
is to be invoked. But it should have happened “soon before her<\/p>\n
death.” The said phrase, no doubt, is an elastic expression and<\/p>\n
can refer to a period either immediately before her death or<\/p>\n
within a few days or even a few weeks before it. But the<\/p>\n
proximity to her death is the pivot indicated by that expression.<\/p>\n
The legislative object in providing such a radius of time by<\/p>\n
employing the words “soon before her death” is to emphasize<\/p>\n
the idea that her death should, in all probabilities, have been the
\n  Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and       [12]
\n  Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
aftermath of such cruelty or harassment. In other words, there<\/p>\n
should be a perceptible nexus between her death and the dowry-<\/p>\n
related harassment or cruelty inflicted on her. If the interval<\/p>\n
elapsed between the infliction of such harassment or cruelty and<\/p>\n
her death is vide the court would be in a position to gauge that in<\/p>\n
all probabilities the harassment or cruelty would not have been<\/p>\n
the immediate cause of her death. It is hence for the Court to<\/p>\n
decide, on the facts and circumstances of each case, whether the<\/p>\n
said interval in that particular case was sufficient to snuff its<\/p>\n
cord from the concept ” soon before her death”.\n<\/p>\n
In Hira Lal and others v. State ( Govt. of NCT) Delhi, 2003<\/p>\n
(3) RCR (Crl.), 830 (SC): the Hon’ble Apex Court observed<\/p>\n
that the expression “soon before her death” used in the<\/p>\n
substantive Section 304-B IPC and Section 113-B of the<\/p>\n
Evidence Act is present with the idea of proximity test. No<\/p>\n
definite period has been indicated and the and the expression<\/p>\n
“soon before” is not defined. A reference to the expression ”<\/p>\n
soon before” used in Section 114 illustration (a) of the<\/p>\n
Evidence Act is relevant. It lays down that a court may presume<\/p>\n
that a man who is in the possession of goods ” soon after the<\/p>\n
theft, is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them<\/p>\n
to be stolen, unless he can account for their possession”. The<\/p>\n
determination of the period which can come within the term<\/p>\n
“soon before ” is left to be determined by the courts, depending<\/p>\n
upon facts and circumstances of each case. Suffice, however, to
\n                Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and     [13]
\n                Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
              indicate that the expression ” soon before” would normally<\/p>\n
              imply that the interval should not be much between the cruelty<\/p>\n
              or harassment concerned and the death in question. There must<\/p>\n
              be existence of a proximate and live link between the effect of<\/p>\n
              cruelty based on dowry demand and the death concerned. If the<\/p>\n
              alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has become<\/p>\n
              stale enough not to disturb the mental equilibrium of the woman<\/p>\n
              concerned, it would be of no consequence.”\n<\/p>\n
              In the aforementioned situation, the presumption arising under<\/p>\n
Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code or Section 113-B of the Indian<\/p>\n
Evidence Act could not be invoked against the appellants. The prosecution,<\/p>\n
therefore, must be held to have failed to establish any case against the<\/p>\n
appellants.\n<\/p>\n
              After perusing the legal position and evidence on record, we are<\/p>\n
of the view that the present case does not fall within the perview of Section<\/p>\n
304-B IPC as all the ingredients of Section 304-B have not been proved on<\/p>\n
the basis of statements of the prosecution witnesses. There is nothing on the<\/p>\n
record to show that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by<\/p>\n
the appellants. Moreover, the fact that accused-appellant Parkasho was<\/p>\n
residing separately and husband of the deceased was also not in the house on<\/p>\n
the day of occurrence, the prosecution has not been able to establish that the<\/p>\n
deceased was killed at the hands of accused-appellants. It has also come in<\/p>\n
the statement of DW1 Hari Kishan that he was Sarpanch of village Lohani.<\/p>\n
Accused Harnand came to him and told him that Rajender son of Ram<\/p>\n
Kishan had illicit relation with the wife of Rajbir and being a poor person,
\n                Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and        [14]
\n                Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994<\/p>\n
he could not do anything and sought help from him. He further deposed that<\/p>\n
he called Rajender and warned him to behave properly and not to carry illicit<\/p>\n
relation with the wife of Rajbir in future.\n<\/p>\n
             The prosecution has failed to prove the ingredients of Section<\/p>\n
304-B IPC that Raj Kala died due to harassment or cruelty at the hands of<\/p>\n
in-laws on the ground of dowry but, from the facts and circumstances of the<\/p>\n
case, it is clear that it can be a case of suicide by the deceased.<\/p>\n
             For the reasons recorded above, Crl.Appeal No.124 SB of 1994<\/p>\n
filed by appellants Rajbir and Parkasho is accepted and the judgment of<\/p>\n
conviction and order of sentence dated 31.1.1994 passed by Addl. Sessions<\/p>\n
Judge, Bhiwani, are set aside. The appellants shall stand acquitted of the<\/p>\n
charges framed against them. If they are on bail, they shall stand discharged<\/p>\n
of their bail bonds. If they are in custody, they shall be set at liberty at once,<\/p>\n
if not required in any other case.\n<\/p>\n
             In view of the above, Crl.Appeal No.436 DBA of 1994 filed by<\/p>\n
the State is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
 (UMA NATH SINGH)                             (DAYA CHAUDHARY)\n     JUDGE                                          JUDGE\n\n\nFebruary 20, 2009.\nraghav\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009 Criminal Appeal No. 436 DBA of 1994 and [1] Criminal Appeal No.124-SB of 1994 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Appeal No.436 DBA of 1994 State of Haryana …..Appellant Vs. Harnand and another …..Respondents. AND Criminal […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-178820","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-28T03:36:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-28T03:36:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":3880,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009\",\"name\":\"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-28T03:36:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-28T03:36:09+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-28T03:36:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009"},"wordCount":3880,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009","name":"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-28T03:36:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-haryana-vs-harnand-and-another-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Haryana vs Harnand And Another on 20 February, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178820","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178820"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178820\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178820"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178820"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178820"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}