Arun Kumar and Others vs State of U.P.

G.S.N. Tripathi, J.—This revision petition has been directed against the order dated 23.3.96 passed by the VIIIth Addl. Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in S. T. No. 185 of 1996, State v. Arun Kumar and Ors., u/s 304B, I.P.C., P.S. Vijaynagar, District Ghaziabad, whereby the learned trial Judge has proceeded to frame charges against the accused u/s 304B of the I.P.C.

On 30.10.93 Sri T.R. Sharma, 94, Engineer''s Enclave, Pritampura, Delhi lodged an F.I.R. at the Police Station. He has alleged that his daughter Smt. Vikky was married with revisionist No. 1 Arun Kumar on 1.12.96. Sri Sunder Lal, revisionist No. 2 is his father. Revisionist No. 3 Varun Kumar is the younger brother of Shri Arun Kumar. Revisionist No. 4 Smt. Nirmala is the wife of Sri Sunder Lal, revisionist No. 2. He has further alleged that he had given all sorts of dowries as demanded by the accused. Even then the members of her in-law used to torture her daughter. On 23.10.92, a daughter was born to Smt. Vikky. As and when she used to come to the house of her parents, she used to tell that they (i.e., the Petitioner s) are not good people. They used to extract the money from her Bank and Post Office accounts and threatened her to beat. Under those circumstances, Smt. Vikky committed suicide.

From the entire narration of the fact in the F.I.R., there is no allegation that the revisionists ever demanded any dowry from Smt. Vikky or the complainant.

Some letters left by Smt. Vikky were shown to me. Annexure 2 is a letter, Nil addressed to the husband. In this letter, she has written that no one is responsible for the action, which she is going to take. She has requested that proper arrangements be made for minor daughter. Annexure 4 is another letter, in which she has given a complete liberty to the husband to marry anyone, he likes. Another letter, Annexure 6, written by her, is to her father and mother. There is no indication that for non-fulfilment of dowry demands, she is committing suicide.

Thus, prima facie, it is not proved that Smt. Vikky had committed suicide, resulting from the demands of dowry. Thus this cannot be said to be a dowry death case.

The learned VIIIth Addl. Sessions Judge has not examined the record carefully nor he has analysed the evidence available on the record. In fact, there was no evidence at all to show that the lady was subjected to any cruelty on account of demand of dowry. There was no evidence to show that the accused ever demanded any dowry from the lady or the complainant.

In the result, the revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 23.3.96 passed in S. T. No. 185/96 is quashed. However, apart from the charge u/s 304B, I.P.C., if evidence is available, the trial court may proceed with other charges, irrespective of the observation made in this judgment.