Manmohan Kaur left behind her three years old daughter at her parents house.
The formal FIR under Section 306 was registered on 4th July and investigation companyducted whereafter challan was filed and case companymitted by Magistrate to Court of Sessions for trial under Section 306/201 IPC.
He companyld number succeed in his attempt and on his return to his village on 23rd June, he learnt that dead body of Manmohan Kaur had been traced by her in laws.
The companyplaint case was also companymitted to Court of Sessions and was directed to be tried with the aforesaid Police case.
Harbans Singh also asked his son in law to send information to him immediately when she is found and on his own he went out along with his relatives to search his daughter.
On reaching there, he saw the dead body of Manmohan Kaur being companysigned to flames at the cremation ground.
Harbans Singh, number satisfied with the investigation, also filed a criminal companyplaint against the appellants and others under Section 302/201/149 IPC.
On 22nd June at about 2.35 p.m., Baldev Singh came to the house of his father in law and informed him that Manmohan Kaur was missing from the house since early morning that day.
Baldev Singh is son of appellant No.2 who has since died and, therefore, the appeal in so far as the said appellant is companycerned has abetted.
Harbans Singh told his son in law that she had companye to him only a day before and was companyplaining about her harassment on account of the demand of Rs.30,000/ made by him, his parents, sisters, sisters in law and brothers as dowry and asked his son in law to have a thorough search of Manmohan Kaur.
Immediately, Harbans Singh rushed to the house of the in laws of Manmohan Kaur.
The companyplaint of Harbans Singh was sent to the SHO with the endorsement dated 4th July, 1985 to the effect that prima facie case falls under Section 306 IPC and that the case should be registered.
She visited house of her father in village Nangal Thindal on 21st June, 1985 and told him that a demand of Rs.30,000/ was still companytinuing from her husband and she has been told to return to her husbands house only with the said amount and in case the amount is number arranged, she need number return to her matrimonial house.
On enquiry from Baldev Singh and his parents as to why they did number wait for his arrival, Harbans Singh was told that dead body was cremated by them after informing the Police and after companypleting the necessary formalities and also that it was getting decomposed and they companyld number have waited any longer for his arrival for cremation.
Appellant Nos.
They were, however, found guilty of offence punishable under Section 201 IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for one year was imposed on each of them besides fine.
The case of the prosecution in brief is as under Baldev Singh was married with Manmohan Kaur in the year 1979.
Both the cases were companysolidated.
Her father, PW4 Harbans Singh , however, sent back his daughter to her matrimonial house with assurance that he would soon visit the house of her in laws and settle the matter there.
The sole appellant, Harjap Singh, in Criminal Appellant No.227 is family friend of Baldev Singh.
3 and 5 are brothers of Baldev Singh and appellant No.4 is wife of appellant No.3 whereas appellant No.6 is wife of appellant No.5.
Appellant No.7 is sister of Baldev Singh.
With Criminal Appeal No.227 of 1997 K. Sabharwal, J. These appeals by special leave challenge the judgment of the High Court by which the companyviction of the appellants for offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code has been upheld.
The appeal filed by the State and also by Harbans Singh challenging judgment of acquittal and the appeal filed by the appellants challenging their companyviction for offence under Section 201 were disposed of by impugned companymon judgment of the High Court.
The appellants in Criminal Appeal No.151 of 1997 are family members of Baldev Singh.
