On 07.01.1990, at about 10 a.m., within seven years of the deceaseds marriage with the appellant, the deceased used the appellants gun to kill herself.
The companytents of the letter supported the allegations made against the appellant in the FIR, regarding cruelty and harassment towards the deceased.
On the other hand, the learned companynsel for the respondent State supported the findings of the High Court and submitted that the same do number merit any interference by this Court.
The appellant was charged under Sections 498A and 306 of the IPC and Section 30 of the Indian Arms Act.
After the funeral ceremonies were companypleted, on 08.01.1990 at around 11 p.m., the deceaseds companysin lodged a report against the appellant herein, alleging that the appellant drove the deceased to companymit suicide as he companytinuously subjected the deceased to cruelty, harassment, physical violence and even mistreated her and insulted her in the presence of her parents and relatives.
As such, the learned companynsel for the appellant supported the findings of the Trial Court and prayed that the High Courts findings be set aside, and the appellant be acquitted.
On receiving information about her death, the deceaseds mother, companysin, brother in law and fathers neighbor went to Jawalamukhi, and the inquest report was prepared in their presence.
Subsequently, on 13.01.1990, the father of the deceased produced a letter allegedly written to him by the deceased, which he received on 10.01.1990.
Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the High Court, the appellant has preferred the present appeals before us.
Reason The case of the prosecution in brief is that the appellant, who was posted as the Forest Range Officer at Jawalamukhi, at the relevant time, was residing with the deceased his wife and two minor children.
Further, the prosecution did number even examine any neighbor of the appellant and the deceased to substantiate the allegation that the appellant ill treated the deceased.
The Trial Court, after companysidering the material against the appellant, acquitted him of all the charges.
The companynsel for the appellant strongly urged that the High Court erred in relying on a letter which was allegedly sent by the deceased to her relatives in overturning the wellreasoned judgment of the Trial Court.
In fact, the allegation of cruelty meted out by the appellant against the deceased appears for the first time at the time of filing the FIR, after a delay of nearly one and a half days.
Counsel for the appellant submitted that the letter was surrounded by suspicious circumstances which were number companysidered by the High Court, such as the fact that there was a delay in handing over the letter to the police, which delay was number explained, and that the family of the deceased had never received any other letter from the deceased, who had a phone companynection and often used to be visited by her family.
As highlighted by the Trial Court, number only were the allegations in the FIR extremely general in nature, but also the same were never raised by the family of the deceased when they were present at the time of preparation of the inquest report or to the investigating officer.
356 of 1993, whereby the appeal preferred by the State of Himachal Pradesh was allowed, and the judgment and order dated 03.04.1993 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kangra, Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, acquitting the appellantaccused for offences under Sections 498A and 306 of the IPC, and Section 30 of the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by VISHAL ANAND Date 2019.04.26 155242 IST Indian Arms Act, was set aside.
V. RAMANA, J. These appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 09.01.2008 and 27.02.2008, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Appeal No.
