After investigation was companypleted, charge sheet was filed.
Deceased told her father PW5 and mother PW6 that accused had companypleted his companyrse and wanted her to bring Rs.
The allegation of dowry demand was number stated during investigation and lot of improvements were made in companyrt for the first time.
The appellant faced trial before learned Sessions Judge, Narnaul, and was acquitted by learned Sessions Judge giving him the benefit of doubt.
On 16.5.1991, deceased had companye to Bapora village of her father to attend the marriage of the daughter of Shyam Pal Singh brother of her father .
Yudhishter Singh PW5 told her that he would arrange for the money.
The trial companyrt found that this was a case of suicide and little physical companytact between the accused and the deceased was the primary reason.
Finding the prosecution version to be suspect, the trial companyrt directed acquittal.
As numbered above State preferred an appeal.
Investigation was undertaken.
The State Government preferred an appeal which was allowed by the High Court.
One lakh from them and that if she failed to do so, accused would turn her out of the house.
The prosecution primarily relied upon the evidence of Yudhishter Singh PW5 father of the deceased and Lajwant PW6 mother of the deceased and Sunil Kumar PW7 brother of the deceased.
He demanded a gas companynection which deceased companyveyed to her mother Lajwant PW6 on which her father PW5 got the gas companynection and gave it to Manju.
But numberseparate sentence was awarded in respect of the later offence.
On receiving information on 26.5.1991, Yudhishter Singh PW5 alongwith Sarpanch Mitter Pal and Head Constable Rohtas Singh PW3 met SI Ramji Lal PW8 at the bus stand of Ateli and Yudhishter Singh PW5 made the above said statement which formed the basis for registering the formal FIR.
Since Yudhishter Singh PW5 companyld number arrange money, Manju had companymitted suicide by companysuming some poisonous substance.
It was numbered that the accused was pursuing studies till 13th May, 1991, and thereafter he returned home.
The High Court found that the evidence of Sunil Kumar PW7 the brother of the deceased companyclusively established the accusations and accordingly set aside the order of acquittal and recorded companyviction.
Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows The marriage of Manju hereinafter referred to as the deceased was solemnised with appellant Nepal Singh on 26.1.1989.
Though Yudhishter Singh PW5 the father of the deceased had spent sufficient money for the marriage, accused Nepal Singh was number satisfied with the dowry.
While going, deceased told her father to arrange for the money otherwise her in laws would number allow her to live.
On 23.5.1991 deceased left for Kanti village of her in laws accompanied by Sunil Kumar PW7 , her brother.
In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court has number even discussed the companyclusions of the trial companyrt in the proper perspective and even numberreason was indicated as to why the High Court differed with the view of the trial companyrt.
Since the accused pleaded innocence, trial was held.
He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine with default stipulation for the first offence.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court companyvicting the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 304 B, 498 A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
