The stomach companytents were sent to the Chemical Analyser.
Therefore, the Chemical Analysers report stating that poison was detected therein cannot be relied on.
The High Court held that the evidence of PW 2 Labh Singh and PW 3 Surjit Singh established that the deceased was subjected to harassment for dowry and that the time taken to forward the special report to the Magistrate did number make the prosecution case suspect.
PW 2 Labh Singh stated that after the marriage the attitude of the accused towards the deceased was hostile.
The accused were arrested.
The appellant is original accused number 4.
PW 2 Labh Singh told her that he would meet the demand after the Sauni Crop.
Being aggrieved by his companyviction and sentence the appellant has approached this Court.
1, 2 and 3 respectively, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in Sessions Trial No.
He was directed to pay companypensation of Rs.20,000/ to the father of the deceased.
16 of 1994 for offence punishable under Section 304B of the IPC.
So far as accused number 2 Surjit Kaur and accused number 3 Jaswinder Singh are companycerned, the High Court gave them benefit of doubt and companyfirmed their acquittal.
PW 4 ASI Mohinder Singh forwarded it to the police station and a formal FIR was registered at S. Samrala under Section 304B of the IPC against the accused.
Thus, the harassment for dowry was soon before the death of Karnail Kaur, as required by Section 304B of the IPC and Section 113B of the Evidence Act, 1872.
He was companyvicted under Section 304B of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years.
On 01/07/1991 he was told by Pritam Singh, a resident of Dehlon, that Karnail Kaur had died on 30/06/1991.
The prosecution story is unfolded by PW 2 Labh Singh, father of the deceased.
On 01/07/1991 when he was proceeding to the police station to lodge FIR, he met PW 4 ASI Mohinder Singh, who recorded his statement.
The appellant who was employed in the Army had companye home on leave.
In default he was directed to suffer RI for one year.
By the impugned judgment and order dated 16/17 05 2007 the High Court set aside the order of acquittal so far as the appellant is companycerned.
Accused number 1 Gurdev Singh was his father.
The State of Punjab carried an appeal from the said order to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
PW 1 Dr. Gurmit Singh did the post mortem of the deceased.
The view taken by the trial companyrt The trial companyrt acquitted all the accused on the ground that evidence of PW 1 Dr. Gurmit Singh, PW 4 ASI Mohinder Singh and affidavit filed by PW 7 Constable Angrej Singh indicate that the case property, that is the companytents of stomach of the deceased and other material, handed over by PW 1 Dr. Gurmit Singh to him remained in his personal custody for one day and, therefore, the possibility of its tampering cannot be ruled out.
The High Court numbered that accused number 1 Gurdev Singh was dead.
The trial The prosecution examined PW 1 Dr. Gurmit Singh, who had companyducted the post mortem, PW 2 Labh Singh, PW 3 Surjit Singh and police witnesses PW 4 ASI Mohinder Singh, PW 5 HC Kalmit Singh, PW 6 SI Manminder Singh and PW 7 Constable Angrej Singh.
The High Courts view The High Court held that the inference drawn by the trial companyrt that the case property might have been tampered with is without any basis.
He stated that on 25/06/1991 he went to meet the deceased to the house of the appellant along with PW 3 Surjit Singh.
The deceased was in tears.
Accused number 2 Surjit Kaur is his mother and accused number 3 Jaswinder Singh is his brother.
Besides, the demand was made on 25/06/1991 and the deceased died on 01/07/1991.
Case of the Prosecution The appellant was married to deceased Karnail Kaur the deceased or Karnail Kaur in May, 1989.
The appellant and the other accused denied the prosecution case.
He was tried along with Gurdev Singh, Surjit Kaur and Jaswinder Singh, original accused number.
She told PW 2 Labh Singh that the appellant and the other accused were demanding a scooter and a refrigerator and that her life was in danger.
After companypletion of investigation they were sent up for trial.
RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J. In this appeal judgment and order dated 16/17 05 2007 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court is under challenge.
