Ranbir Singh and others vs State of Haryana

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The criminal miscellaneous application has been filed seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment of the applicant/appellant No.2-Babu Ram during the pendency of the appeal.

According to the complainant-Brijbir Singh, he had married his daughter Renu (deceased) with Ranbir Singh (appellant No.1) on 02.02.2006. He gave sufficient dowry in the marriage which was entrusted to his parents-in-law Babu Ram-applicant/appellant No.2 (father-in-law), Bala Devi (mother-in-law) (appellant No.3) and Ranbir Singh (appellant No.1) (husband) respectively of Renu (deceased). After some days of the marriage, the husband and parents-in-law of Renu (deceased) had started harassing her for bringing inadequate dowry. They were not happy with the dowry which had been brought by Renu (deceased) and felt humiliated for not being given a car. They raised a demand before Renu (deceased) for bringing a new car and also Rs.50,000/-in cash. The said demand was disclosed by Renu (deceased) to the complainant. The complainant had convened a Panchayat of the respectables and in the Panchayat, the parents-in-law and husband of Renu promised not to raise demand of dowry. However, after some days the accused again raised demand for dowry and started beating her. It was alleged that Ranbir Singh (appellant No.1) husband of Renu (deceased) was a drunkard and had been beating and hurling abuses on his daughter. In connection with the same, the complainant along with his brother Sethpal went to the house of the accused and talked about the matter. However, accused did not change their behaviour. On 11.09.2008 at about 9.00 pm, Babu Ram-applicant/appellant No.2 on telephone asked him to come to Jagadhri along with his wife as he wanted to discuss something. On 12.09.2008, Babu Ram (applicant/appellant No.2) again had made a telephone call and informed that his daughter had killed herself by hanging. The complainant informed about the incident to his relatives and reached the matrimonial home of his daughter and found that she was lying on the floor. He saw marks of injuries on her eye, arms and other parts of the body. Seeing the same, the complainant sensed that the accused by conniving with each other had killed his daughter for not fullfiling the demand of dowry.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yamunanagar at Jagadhri found all the appellants guilty for having committed an offence u/s 304-B read with Section 34 IPC. They have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years; besides, pay a fine of Rs.5000/-each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of two months. The learned trial Court held that the deceased was subjected to beatings by the accused which were in connection with the demand of dowry.

The case is one where Renu (deceased) had hanged herself. According to learned counsel for the applicant/appellant No.2-Babu Ram, the only evidence against the applicant/appellant No.2 is of presumption u/s 304-B IPC and Section 113-B of the Evidence Act. The said presumption, it is submitted, is not supported by the fact that Renu (deceased) was harassed and was thrown out of the matrimonial home before her death; besides, it is submitted that no indendent witness from the locality or neighbourhood had been examined to establish the allegations of cruelty and harassment. In any case, it is submitted that the applicant/appellant No.2-Babu Ram has been roped unnecessarily in the allegation of demand of dowry; besides, there is no allegation of harassment. Renu (deceased), it is submitted, committed suicide after two years of her marriage. It is submitted that Ranbir Singh (appellant No.1) who is the husband of Renu (deceased) in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C had taken the stand that his wife Renu (deceased) had a doubt that he was interested in solemnizing his marriage with her younger sister namely Nutan and, therefore, she committed suicide on that account. It is further submitted that the said circumstances had not been given due consideration.

After giving our thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that in terms of the affidavit dated 14.03.2011 of Shri Rattan Singh, Superintendent Jail, District Jail, Yamunanagar at Jagadhri, the applicant/appellant No.2-Babu Ram had undergone imprisonment of two years, five months and twenty five days as on 12.03.2011. As on date, he has undergone more than three years of imprisonment out of the sentence of ten years that has been imposed. The appeal is not likely to mature of hearing in the near future. There are arguable points in the appeal which would require consideration at the time of final hearing. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, it would be just and expedient that the sentence of imprisonment of the applicant/appellant No.2-Babu Ram during the pendency of the appeal is suspended.

Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous application is allowed and the sentence of imprisonment of the applicant/appellant No.2-Babu Ram during the pendency of the appeal shall remain suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yamunanagar at Jagadhri.