http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.)  834 of 1997

PETITIONER: Surinder Kaur & Anr.     

RESPONDENT: State of Haryana         

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25/02/2004

BENCH: N.Santosh Hegde & B.P.Singh.

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

SANTOSH HEGDE,J.

       Two appellants and 3 others were charged before the  Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra for offence punishable  under section 304B read with section 34 IPC in connection with  the suicide of one Baljit Kaur who was married to the first  accused Surinder Kumar about 2 = years prior to her death on  28.1.1992. It was the prosecution case that because of the  harassment meted out to said Baljit Kaur, she consumed poison  on the intervening night of 27th and 28th January, 1992 and died  at about 4 a.m. in Ismailpur village within the jurisdiction of  Police Station Thaska Miranji in Kurukshetra district. The  information of death of Baljit Kaur was conveyed to her family  on the said morning by one Dewa (not examined). On receipt of  the said information, her family members including her brother  Hari Chand PW-6 went to the village where Baljit Kaur’s in- laws were residing and PW-6 having come to the conclusion  that his sister had died under suspicious circumstances, lodged  a complaint with Thaska Miranji P.S. on 28.1.1992 at about  12.40 p.m. The initial investigation in regard to the death of  Baljit Kaur was conducted by PW-10 which was later  completed by Sub-Inspector of Police who was examined as  PW-9 who submitted the chargesheet for the offence stated  hereinabove and after trial the Sessions Court came to the  conclusion that the prosecution has established its case as  against all the accused and it awarded 10 years’ RI to A-2  Basawa Singh who was the father-in-law of the deceased, while  A-3 Shanti Devi, mother-in-law, was awarded 8 years’ RI and  A-4 Surinder Kaur and A-5 Rajvinder Kaur were awarded 7  years’ RI each \026 all under section 304B IPC while A-1 Surinder  Kumar, the husband of the deceased was awarded life  imprisonment under section 304B IPC.

       Aggrieved accused persons preferred an appeal before  the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh which by  the impugned judgment confirmed the conviction and sentence  awarded to A-1 Surinder Kumar, husband and A-4 and A-5  Surinder Kaur and Rajwinder Kaur, the sisters-in-law of the  deceased. It allowed the appeal of A-2 Basawa Singh, the  father-in-law and A-3 Shanti Devi, the mother-in-law of the  deceased and acquitted them of the charges.

       The present appeal before us is preferred by A-3  Rajwinder Kaur and A-4 Surinder Kaur who, at the time of the  incident, were aged 18 and 16 years respectively and were  unmarried. We are told at the Bar that their brother Surinder  Kumar, the husband of the deceased has not preferred any

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

appeal, hence, the conviction and sentence imposed on him by  the two courts below has attained finality.

       Mr. K.B. Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the  appellants, contended that both the courts below have  committed serious error in accepting the prosecution case as  against the appellants herein though no specific allegation  whatsoever has been made by the prosecution against them. He  pointed out that the only allegation found against these  appellants is in a general manner in the FIR filed by PW-6 and  in the evidence of PWs.-6 and 7 in their examinations-in-chief  which the learned counsel submitted under no stretch of  imagination could be construed as sufficient evidence to base a  conviction. He submitted that one of the ingredients necessary  for establishing the allegation of harassment against an accused  person under section 304B is that the concerned accused had  harassed the victim soon before the death. After reading the evidence of PWs.6 and 7 in conjunction  with the contents of the FIR, the learned counsel pointed out  that so far as the allegation against these appellants are  concerned, it is omnibus in nature and has been made without  any specific instance only to involve the entire family of the  appellants. He pointed out that the appellants who were then 18  and 16 years of age and unmarried, could not have gone to the  extent of causing such harassment which would compel the  deceased to commit suicide. At any rate the learned counsel  pointed out that whatever allegation that is found in the FIR and  in the evidence of PWs.6 & 7, could only relate to a period  immediately after the marriage of deceased to A-1 which was  about 2 = years prior to the incident.

       Mr. D P Singh, learned counsel appearing for the State,  however, defended the judgments of the two courts below  contending that the same being a concurrent finding of fact, the  same does not require any interference in this appeal. Since the  present appeal is preferred by accused 4 and 5 who are the  sisters-in-law of the deceased, we will confine our  consideration of the evidence led by the prosecution as against   them only. It is noticed, as contended by learned counsel for the  appellants, that the complainant states that these appellants  along with their brother used to harass Baljit Kaur for not  bringing sufficient dowry and a Maruti car. In that process they  used to beat the deceased. It is rather difficult to believe that  these two young girls would go to the extent of beating the  deceased merely based on a statement made by the brother of  the deceased that too after the incident of his sister committing  suicide without his evidence being corroborated in material  particulars. From a perusal of the evidence of PW-6, two facts  emerge. One is a general allegation of harassment against the  mother of A-1 and the appellants herein. It is to be noted that  mother of A-1 who was an accused has been acquitted by the  courts below solely on the ground that hers and her husband’s  name did not find mention in the complaint even though the  prosecution has alleged harassment by similar evidence as is  available against the appellants. The second fact that arises out  of the evidence of PW-6 is that he has made specific allegations  against the husband A-1 and the father in regard to the demand  of Maruti car, a buffalo, Rs.25,000 just before the death of the  deceased. Therefore, this factum shows that these 2 persons  might have been responsible for harassment soon before the  victim’s death which is one of the conditions precedent under  section 304B IPC but then the High Court thought it fit to  acquit the father of A-1 (father-in-law of the deceased) because  his name was also not mentioned in the FIR which means the  High Court did not believe the oral evidence led by the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

prosecution in regard to him and his wife. Therefore the  evidence led by the prosecution should be appreciated in this  background.

       We have noticed neither PW-6 nor PW-7 or for that  matter the complaint does give the particulars of the time and  date when the alleged harassment was meted out by the  appellants. As noticed by us hereinabove, these statements are  omnibus in nature. The specific allegations of harassment made  only involves A-1 and his father with whose case we are not  concerned now. The appellants are neither parties to the  demand for a buffalo or Rs.25,000 which seems to be the  proximate cause of Baljit Kaur committing suicide. The courts  below in appreciating the evidence have failed to appreciate the  material on record properly nor have they applied the required  standard of proof necessary to base a conviction on the  appellants. We have already noticed that if at all the prosecution  case against these appellants is to be accepted it would only  show that soon after the marriage i.e. about 2 = years prior to  the death of the deceased, there was some alleged harassment  for lack of dowry which, in our opinion, is not a sufficient  ground to hold the appellants guilty for the offence charged,  since these allegations are not proximate to the death of the  deceased.         Having perused the evidence of PW-7 also, in our  opinion, the same does not further the cause of the prosecution  any more than what is discussed by us hereinabove about the  evidence of PW-6. As a matter of fact, a careful consideration  of the evidence of PW-7 in regard to the involvement of the  appellants herein clearly shows that part of the evidence of PW- 7 is an improvement inasmuch as he has not stated the specific  allegations now he is making before the trial court in his  previous statement to the Police as could be seen from Ex. D-8.

       It is also be noted that the High Court on the same set of  evidence has chosen to acquit the mother of the appellants  whose case is no better than that of the appellant. Of course, the  only difference between the evidence led by the prosecution in  regard to their mother and the appellants is that the name of the  mother is not found in the FIR. That by itself in the facts of this  case is not sufficient to differentiate the case of the appellants  for conviction. Even the allegation made against the appellants  in the FIR assuming it to be proved shows certain harassment  much before the death which is not sufficient to bring home the  guilt under Section 304 B IPC otherwise the evidence led by the  prosecution is similar to that led against their mother. We agree  with the High Court that the evidence against the mother is  insufficient to convict her and in our opinion it is the same  against appellants.             For the reasons stated above, we are of the considered  opinion that the evidence led by the prosecution in regard to the  involvement of the appellants in the death of Baljit Kaur is not  proved beyond all reasonable doubts by the prosecution, hence,  the courts below were in error in basing a conviction as against  these appellants.         

       For the reasons stated above, this appeal succeeds and the  same is allowed. The appellants are on bail. Their bail-bonds  shall stand discharged.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4