AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Deepak Gupta, J.—This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 2nd May, 2003 delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Solan in Sessions Trial No. 2-S/7 of 2003 whereby he acquitted the accused persons of having committed offences punishable under Sections 306, 498-A and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Raksha Devi (deceased) was married to Desh Raj @ Dinesh Kumar. Respondents No. 2 and 3 Duni Chand and Krishna Devi are the parents of Desh Raj @ Dinesh Kumar and Sunita Devi is his sister. The marriage of Raksha Devi took place some time in the year 1992 and from the facts which stand proved on record, it is established that earlier she and her husband were residing at Mathura for about 3 years. Thereafter, she had to deliver a child and came back to her parents house. She delivered two female children. The reason is not clear, but it appears that thereafter, Raksha Devi and her husband Desh Raj @ Dinesh Kumar started residing in village Uncha Gaon with her parents. From the statement of Dharam Singh (PW1) father of the deceased, it is apparent that the villagers raised some objection to the son-in-law residing with the father-in-law. We find no reason why the villagers should interfere in such personal matters. Be that as it may, the facts remains that as per the prosecution itself, thereafter, a Panchayat was held which was conducted by PW8 Lachhi Ram and admittedly after this Raksha Devi and her husband started living in the village of the husband. Thereafter, another daughter was born and about 1-2 months prior to the suicide, Raksha Devi delivered a male child. On 9.8.2002, Raksha Devi alongwith two of her daughters jumped in a well in the village and unfortunately died alongwith two children. Thereafter, on the statement EX. PA of complainant PW1, Dharam Singh, FIR EX. PL was registered. The police carried out the investigation and after investigation, came to the conclusion that Raksha Devi had been treated with cruelty by the accused which had driven her to commit suicide.
The accused was challaned and charged for having committed aforesaid offences. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge and after trial have been acquitted by the learned trial Court. Hence, this appeal by the State.
We have gone through the statement of the complainant PW1 Dharam Singh and finds that no case what so ever is made out. According to PW-1, Raksha Devi and accused Desh Raj @ Dinesh Kumar lived together at Mathura for about 3 years. Then they came back and lived in his house and the villagers insisted the son-in-law either to go to his own village or hire separate accommodation. A Panchayat was held and thereafter, Raksha Devi (deceased ) alongwith her husband and children went to the village of her husband, Desh Raj. Admittedly, all this happened about 5-6 years prior to the suicide. The only allegation of the father is that after he came to know about the suicide, he was told by his wife that Raksha Devi had rung up her mother and told her that she had fallen down from a height and some injury had been caused to her uterus. At this stage, Raksha Devi had also complained that the accused were maltreating her and insisting that she should cut grass from " Any where". He has in his examination-in-chief itself clearly stated that when the deceased Raksha Devi used to visit her parental home she did not complain about her husband''s conduct. Thus, other than making a general allegation of maltreatment, there is no specific allegation as to why she has been maltreated.
According to the other witnesses, the deceased was being maltreated on account of the fact that she had given birth only to two female children. Even if this aspect is believed to be correct the fact is that prior to the suicide, she had given birth to a male child and at that stage, maltreatment should have been ended. From the statement of the prosecution witnesses itself, it is apparent that the deceased was insisting that her husband should take her to Chandigarh where he was working but the husband was not in a position to take her to Chandigarh because he was lowly paid and did not have the means to support his wife and three children at Chandigarh.
It is not necessary to discuss the evidence of the other witnesses in detail but it would suffice to state that none of them have given any specific instance of maltreatment but have only made general allegations that the accused were maltreating the deceased since she has given birth to female children. There is no material placed on record to show what was the immediate cause which led to the deceased taking this drastic step of committing suicide and also killing her two children along with herself. Keeping in view the aforesaid discussions, we find no merit in the appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. Bail bonds are ordered to be discharged.