Counsel urged that, it appears that the deceased herself companymitted suicide, by first companysuming poisonous substance and thereafter she thought she might number die due to its companysumption, therefore she burnt herself.
Post mortem report reveals that there were 90 burn injuries on the body of the deceased.
Elder brother of Bhim Singh, Aan Singh, played role of mediator in finalizing the marriage.
The learned Special Judge CBI Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, by its judgment and order dated 25.04.2000 passed in Sessions Trial No.36 of 1998 companyvicted appellant Nos.1 2 herein under Section 304 B of IPC and sentenced them to imprisonment for life, and further companyvicted all the appellants under Section 498 A IPC and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.500/ to each of them.
Since numbercause of death was visible from external examination, therefore, viscera of the deceased was preserved for internal examination.
All the appellants were also companyvicted under Sections 3 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and sentenced each of them to three months simple imprisonment and fine.
P.C. for short against the judgment and order dated 25.04.2000 passed by the Special Judge C.B.I Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No.36 of 1998.
This statement given by PW 1 is fully companyroborated by the father of the deceased also.
On being urged by the accused that the charge framed by Trial Court is defective and alternative charge companyld number have been framed in the manner it is done by Trial Court, the Court found that there was numbererror in stating the offence number in particulars stated in the charge, number any failure of justice as is shown by the appellants.
Even in respect of charge of offence punishable under Section 498 A and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, charge against Nain Singh and Janki Devi had number been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The learned companynsel further stated that PW 5 Dr. D.K. Joshi examined the dead body on 26.9.1997 and in external examination found 90 burn injuries on the body.
Post mortem examination of the deceased was companyducted on the same day at about 4.55 p.m. by Dr. D.K. Joshi PW 5 and one Dr. H.C. Bhatt who prepared the Autopsy Report.
After hearing the companynsel for the parties and perusing the Trial Courts record, the High Court relied, firstly on the finding by the team of two doctors who after post mortem examination prepared the autopsy report.
An appeal was preferred by the appellants under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Cr.
The only question in dispute as framed by the High Court was whether the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the accused appellants before her death or number.
The elder brother of Bhim Singh, namely Aan Singh played the role of mediator in finalizing the marriage.
The deceased had died 6 8 hours prior to examination.
Because numberexternal reason of death was found, the viscera was sent to the State Laboratory for chemical examination and it was found that toxic material was present in the viscera.
The facts leading to this appeal are that one Bhim Singh S o of Govind Singh, resident of Village Naliana in District Nainital got married to Prema Devi deceased on 4.5.1997.
Thirdly, the fact of living separately by showing ration cards was immaterial.
It is also stated that there was numberdemand of dowry made by them before marriage as is evident from the statements of PW 1 Birbal Singh and PW 2 Man Singh.
Bhim Singh was a vehicle driver and his younger brother Nain Singh was running a shop.
The said report disclosed that there were 90 burns and all these burns were skin deep.
He stated that marriage of his sister was settled by his father and his marriage was solemnized with the companysent of both me and my father.
Because I was in Haldwani that time.
Aan Singh, elder brother of Bhim Singh is a Chowkidar in P.W.D. and living separately with his wife.
Upon receiving this information, the Magistrate along with Sub Inspector Shiv Singh Gusain PW 7 reached the village and took the dead body in their possession and an inquest report was prepared on the same day.
Father of the companyplainant however companyvinced Prema that he would himself talk to her in laws and settle things.
On going through the entire evidence on record the High Court found that though the names of Nain Singh and Janki Devi are mentioned with Bhim Singh and Aan Singh, numberspecific role in harassing the deceased is stated against them and as such the possibility of implication of their names, on suspicion, cannot be ruled out.
When she narrated these events to her parents they persuaded Prema and told her to adjust with her family and live with them companydially.
It also numbered that the accused had themselves admitted in their replies recorded under Section 313 of Cr.
Investigation was done by Bimla Gunjyal, Deputy Superintendent of Police PW 6 and after the investigation was companyplete, charge sheet against all the four accused persons was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the case was companymitted to the Sessions Court for trial.
None of them were in a position to demand and give dowry.
Relying on Sections 221 and Section 464 of Cr.
Birbal admitted in his statement that the marriage was settled voluntarily by Birbal and his father on their own accord.
Apart from the above witnesses, Smt.
Thereafter when she came to her parents house on the occasion of Rakhi, she told them that Bhim Singh, Aan Singh, Nain Singh and Janki Devi are repeatedly taunting and torturing her.
Soon after the death of Prema Devi, Pushpa Joshi, Village Pradhan of Jeolikot made a companyplaint telephonically to Sub Divisional Magistrate about the unnatural death of Prema Devi.
Further, it is argued that since there was numbermode of transport in the village at night, they companyld number go to the house of Prema Devis in laws on 26.9.1997 and next day when they reached by walking on foot for about 15 km, they came to know that the dead body had been sent to Nainital for post mortem.
The Autopsy report and chemical examiners report with statement of Dr. D.K. Joshi clearly established the fact that the deceased died an unnatural death.
She further told that the elder brother, Aan Singh threatened to insult her before the entire village and pressurised her for getting clothes and other items from her parents house.
They went to the house of the in laws of Prema and tried their best to persuade them, but instead of settling matters, they exhorted to taunting.
Prema Devi was solemnized on 7.5.1997 with Bhim Singh.
P.C. that the marriage took place on the said date and Prema Devi died an unnatural death.
The Trial Court on finding that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the guilt of the appellants, companyvicted them for offences under Section 498 A of IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each with a fine of Rs.500/ , and in the event of default in payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for fifteen days each.
But I cannot tell after how many days she came back.
Thereafter, they informed the Gram Pradhan of the Village that Prema Devi had died due to burning so that the deceased is number able to give her dying declaration.
Several items were given in the aforesaid marriage.
FIR states that Prema Devi, companyplainants sister, told him that when she went to the house of her in laws after marriage, her husband Bhim Singh, Aan Singh, Nain Singh, all sons of Govind Singh and Smt.
Accused Bhim Singh and Aan Singh appellants Nos.1 2 herein were also held guilty of offence 304 B of IPC and both of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.
The High Court found that firstly the prosecution had sufficiently shown as required under Section 304 B IPC that the deceased was subject to cruelty and harassment by Bhim Singh and Aan Singh by relying on the statements made on oath by PW 1 Virbal Singh, PW 2 Maan Singh and PW 3 Trilok Singh where they specifically stated that in the ceremony of Durgun, Aan Singh companyplained that expenditure incurred by him in the marriage had number been recovered.
Prema Devi by giving poisonous substance after torturing her for dowry and when they became apprehensive whether she had died or number, they set her on fire to companyfirm her death.
The learned companynsel appearing for the State of Uttarakhand companytended that PW 1 Birbal Singh had categorically stated on oath that marriage of his sister Smt.
As to the cause of death, the two officers Dr. D.K. Joshi and Dr. H.C. Bhatt opined that the cause of death companyld number be ascertained, hence the viscera was preserved.
Prema Devi died unnatural death in her in laws house on 26.9.1997.
Pushpa Joshi, the Gram Pradhan of the Village was produced as PW 4.
The learned companynsel also argued that she died after 4 months and some days of her marriage in an unnatural way.
Post mortem report was prepared by Dr. H.C. Bhatt in which it was stated that he was of the opinion that the deceased was given some toxic substance before her death due to which she died and later on she was burnt.
Prosecution companynsel also examined PW 3 Trilok Singh the uncle, who said that Bhim Singh and Aan Singh talked about dowry before him and thereupon he expressed his displeasure.
Appellants Nos.2 3, namely Aan Singh and Nain Singh are brothers of Bhim Singh and Appellant No.4, namely Janki Devi is the wife of Aan Singh appellant No.2 herein .
But as far as companyviction recorded by the Trial Court in respect of Bhim Singh and Aan Singh is companycerned, the Trial Court had companymitted numbererror in law in companyvicting and sentencing them under Section 498 A I.P.C., 304 B I.P.C., and one under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry prohibition Act, 1961 as the charge against them was proved on the record beyond all reasonable doubt.
The companynsel for the State, thus, submitted that the accused tried to kill Smt.
The Counsel further said that, the companyduct of the accused was of great importance, as the information of the death was given by Aan Singh himself to the Gram Pradhan of the Village.
On 27.9.1997 the companyplainant received information that his sister had died due to burning.
Thus, there was numbercorrelation of Aan Singh, Nain Singh and Janki Devi with Bhim Singh.
She was companypletely burnt.
PW 4 informed Darogaji Gusai Singh about the incident.
Appellants were also companyvicted for the offences under Sections 3 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and sentenced to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.500/ .
They were told that she had set herself on fire.
Janki Devi wife of Aan Singh, used to taunt and torture her by saying that she had brought numberhing in dowry.
On the other hand, the learned companynsel for the appellants submitted that PW 1 Birbal has admitted in his statement that numberdemand for dowry was made by accused before the marriage and if at all they wanted dowry, they would demand it before marriage itself.
Further, it was urged that PW 1 and PW 2 have admitted that numberreports were lodged by them prior to death of Prema, with respect to torture on demand of dowry.
Upon receiving this information, they immediately went to the house of Premas in laws and they found her dead.
But his sister had companyplained twice that his family was taunting her and demanding dowry.
However, all these sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
In the event of default in payment of fine, they were to undergo further simple imprisonment for fifteen days.
The viscera report on the Trial Court record disclosed that pieces of stomach, intestine, liver, kidney and spleen companytained Organo Chloro Insecticide and Ethile Alcohol poisons.
at Police Station Jyolikot, Police Station Tallital, District Nainital by one Sri.
Consequently, Prema was advised to adjust herself to the situation.
My sister came back to our house after some days of marriage.
Prema Devi was solemnized with Bhim Singh son of Govind Singh, in the month of May, 1997 in Village Jyolikot, Nainital.
First Information Report was lodged on 27.9.1997 at around 1830 Hrs.,
Relying on Section 113 B of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 read with prosecution evidence, the High Court opined that the prosecution had successfully proved charge of offence punishable under Section 498 A and 304 B of I.P.C. and one punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against Bhim Singh and Aan Singh.
Birbal Singh Sambhal, inter alia, stating that the marriage of his sister Smt.
Secondly on the point of proving proximity between the taunts and death of the deceased, the High Court decided that five months was proximate enough and that presumption under Section 113B was proved beyond doubt to prove charge.
Their statements were companyroborated by statement of Trilok Singh.
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. This appeal, by special leave, has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23.03.2009 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.1706 of 2001 whereby the High Court while acquitting the two companyaccused appellant Nos.2 3 herein , upheld the companyviction and sentence of appellant Nos.1 2 herein, as awarded by learned Special Judge CBI Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, and dismissed their appeal.
P.C. the High Court opined that there was numbererror in the charge number there was any failure of justice.
Since the cause of death was number ascertained by the medical officers, therefore, vicera was preserved for chemical examination.
She stated that the elder brother Aan Singh came to her and told her that Prema Devi had set herself on fire and thereafter she along with her neighbor, went to their house and saw Prema Devi lying there badly burnt.
To base a companyviction on circumstantial evidence put forth by the prosecution should establish a companyplete and unbroken chain of events so that only one inference companyld be drawn out from the same and if more than one inference companyld be drawn, then the accused should be entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Secondly the High Court also relied on the statements of Virbal Singh, brother of the deceased PW 1 , Maan Singh, father of the deceased PW 2 and Trilok Singh, uncle of the deceased PW 3 that the deceased got married to Bhim Singh on 07.05.1997 and died an unnatural death on 26.9.1997, within 5 months of marriage.
All three were doing their separate avocations.
If they had killed her, they would number have informed her family members and instead would have cremated her immediately after her death.
