The Sessions Court by the said judgment companyvicted the appellant u s 304 B IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/ , in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 months.
On 2.3.1997 he and his sisters son PW 2 companyplainant came to the house of the accused at Budhlada to see Amarjit Kaur, She told them that her in laws are maltreating her.
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA,J This appeal is directed against judgment dated 9th December, 2009 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.
Plastic cane and match box were found near the dead body.
At the gate, they heard shrieks from the roof of the house.
He along with his maternal uncle PW 3 Bhola Singh had gone once or twice to house of her in laws and requested them that since they are poor people and they cannot afford more dowry.
471 SB of 1999 whereby the High Court companyfirmed the judgment and order dated 23rd April, 1999 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa in Sessions Case No.14 of 12th May, 1997.
During the cross examination PW 3 was number in a position to given the exact details of the neighbours of the Devinder Singh.
P5 vide memo P.E. which was attested by him.
PD was recorded.
It is alleged that in laws of Amarjit Kaur has murdered her by setting her on fire.
He denied the suggestion that the accused had number demanded dowry prior to bhog ceremony of his father.
Police met them near the Hospital where his statement Ex.
Accused Davinder Singh used to demand motor cycle as dowry.
Teja Singh was left to guard dead body he and his uncle went to the Police Station.
Paramjit Kaur and Swaranjit Kaur are also sisters of the appellant.
When they were near the gate of the house, then they heard shrieks and screams from the roof.
Rupinder Singh, Sub Inspector met the companyplainant near the crossing of Civil Hospital, Budhalda, where statement of Jaswinder Singh Ex.
However, the appellant was number satisfied and again started demanding more dowry.
When they were just entering the gate, mother in law of the deceased shouted that deceased should be finished today.
PW 2s marriage took place on 9.2.1997 Davinder Singh and Amarjit Kaur attended his marriage.
To settle deceased in her in laws house, Jaswinder Singh borrowed a sum of Rs.20,000/ and gave the amount to the appellant.
On 9.2.1997, marriage of Jaswinder Singh, companyplainant, was solemnized.
The dead body of Amarjit Kaur was found in the bathroom in a burnt companydition.
During the cross examination, PW 2 denied the suggestion that after his marriage he did number visit Budhlada.
Jaswinder Singh complainant brother of Amarjit Kaur and Teja Singh mediator had requested the in laws of Amarjit Kaur number to harass and torture her for dowry but they companytinued to maltreat and harass the deceased.
P.D. was recorded.
Documentary evidences were also exhibited.
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Amarjit Kaur deceased was married to accused Davinder Singh appellant herein 6/7 months before the date of occurrence i.e. 3rd March, 1997.
Then PW 2 told the accused that he will meet them the next day.
On 2.3.1997, he received telephone call from his sister that she is being maltreated by her in laws on account of dowry.
The companyplainant took Rs.20,000/ from his uncle and gave it to accused Davinder Singh.
The Police met them in front of Hospital.
Apart from the appellant other family members, namely, Kuldip Singh, Darshana Devi and Parveen kaur were also accused before the Trial Court.
As per message, Jaswinder Singh and his maternal uncle Bhola Singh went to Budhlada to enquire about the welfare of deceased.
They were acquitted of the charges leveled against them against which numberappeal was filed by the State.
They left the house telling that they will companye again with some wise person.
The deceased informed them that she was being harassed for more dowry by her in laws.
When they reached at the gate of the house, they heard shrieks upstairs.
Paramjit Kaur and Swaranjit Kaur were two other accused who were juvenile therefore their cases were separated.
He reported that death was due to asphyxia as a result of 95 to 100 burns which were ante mortem in nature and was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary companyrse of nature.
She should be finished.
But in laws of the deceased were number satisfied and they companytinued to demand more dowry.
The in laws of deceased used to maltreat her.
On 3.3.1997, PW 2 along with his maternal uncle Bhola Singh and mediator Teja Singh reached the house of the accused.
Teja Singh was mediator of marriage of Amarjit Kaur with Davinder Singh.
After companypletion of investigation, challans was presented.
At the time of marriage, sufficient dowry was given by the parents of Amarjit Kaur as per their status, but after the marriage in laws of Amarjit Kaur started torturing companyrcing her to bring more dowry.
When they went on roof Kuldeep Singh, Davinder Singh, Darshana Devi, Parveen Kaur, Swaranjit Kaur and Paramjit Kaur came down running.
The accused demanded more money from the companyplainant.
The relations of deceased with her husband and in laws remained companydial for about two months.
One plastic cane and match box were lying near to her dead body.
Teja Singh was deputed to guard the dead body, when Jaswinder Singh and Bhola Singh went to lodge report.
Deceased and her husband Davinder Singh had attended the marriage.
But appellant and his family did number agree.
Amarjit Kaur was also harassed by her step mother.
Accused were charged u s 304 B/149 IPC to which the accused pleaded number guilty and claimed trial.
When they went upwards, they saw Amarjit Kaur lying dead in bathroom with burns all over the body.
Similar plea has been taken by the companynsel for the appellant to assail the impugned judgment.
After marriage, Davinder Singh demanded Rs.20,000/ from the companyplainant on the ground that Jaswinder Singh was given more dowry than him.
Defence version of the accused appellant was that he is impotent and on account of this reason, Amarjit Kaur was under depression.
Then they went running upstairs.
Defence also examined seven witnesses.
Thereafter her in laws started ill treating her on one pretext or the other that her parents had number given scooter and cloths given were number upto mark.
The accused were demanding more dowry.
On 3.3.1997 at about 5.30 PM, Jaswinder Singh, his maternal uncle Bhola Singh and Teja Singh went to the house of accused Davinder Singh.
Because of these reasons, she has companymitted suicide.
Plastic cane and match box were found lying near the dead body.
They again went on 3.3.1997 along with Teja Singh to the house of the accused at Budhlada.
The probable duration of time that elapsed between the injuries and death was immediate and between death and the postmortem was within 24 hours.
Then they went upstairs.
The prosecution, in support of its case, examined four witnesses.
After entering the house when they were going to the roof of the house, they found Darshana Devi saying that Amarjit Kaur should number be spared.
Teja Singh son of Bachittar Singh was the mediator in arranging the marriage.
Accused denied all the prosecution allegations and pleaded to be innocent.
On 2.3.1997, deceased telephonically informed Jaswinder Singh that her in laws were torturing and harassing her in companynection with dowry.
They came back by saying that on the next day, they will companye back with some respectable person to settle the dispute.
Kuldeep Singh, Darshana Devi and Parveen are respectively father, mother and sister of the appellant.
PW 1 Dr. Kashmir Singh, had companyducted the post mortem examination.
The matter was reported to the Police Station.
PW 2 Jaswinder Singh brother of the deceased stated that Amarjit Kaur got married with appellant Davinder Singh in July, 1996.
PW 3 Bhola Singh maternal uncle of Amarjit Kaur stated that Amarjit Kaur was married with accused Davinder Singh about seven months prior to her death.
Thereafter the Police came to the house of accused and took into possession plastic cane Ex.
However, for number giving such details of the neighbours, the statement of PW 3 cannot be held to be untrustworthy.
They had spent on marriage of deceased more than their capacity.
P4, and ash wrapped in cloth Ex.
All of them went to the roof of the house and then numbericed Kuldip Singh, accused Davinder Singh, Darshana Devi, Parveen Kaur, Paramjit Kaur and Swaranjit Kaur companying to the ground through staircase.
Then PW 2 took his maternal uncle from Goniana and came to Budhlada in the house of the accused.
They found Amarjit Kaur lying dead with burns in bathroom.
After closure of the prosecution evidence, statements of accused were recoded u s 313 Cr.
After his marriage accused Davinder Singh stated that companyplainant had been given more dowry than him and demanded money from companyplainant.
However, he companyld number give the exact date of telephone call but stated that she had given call on 10 11 AM and on the same day of receiving the telephone he and his uncle went to Budhlada.
On 7.3.1997, accused were arrested.
After making endorsement, statement was forwarded to the Police Station, on the basis of which, formal FIR was registered.
He stated that visited there twice or thrice.
