State of H.P. vs Kuldip Chand

V.K. Ahuja, J.—This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. u/s 378 Cr.P.C. against the judgment of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, dated 30.6.2003, vide which he acquitted the respondent of the charge framed against him under Sections 306 and 498-A I.P.C.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 27.8.1998, at 7.45 P.M., a telephonic message was received by Medical Officer, CHC Barsar, that one woman has been brought to the CHC for treatment, who has taken some poisonous substance. On this report, a rapat No. 19 was registered by the S.H.O. and he proceeded to the CHC for inquiry. He filed an application Ext. PW5/B to the police at 8.00 P.M., as to whether the patient was fit to make statement. The Medical Officer gave his opinion Ext. PW5/C that the patient was not fit to make the statement. He came back to the Police Station. On 29.8.1998, he was informed by the Medical Officer about the death of the patient. He went to the hospital and recorded statement of Mehar Singh, brother of deceased Sureshna Devi. In the statement he had alleged that his younger sister Sureshna was married in the year 1995 to Kuldip Chand, respondent and the dowry was given as per his competence. It was alleged that even after three years of marriage, no child was born and for this reason, his brother-in-law, Kulpdip Chand used to give beatings to his sister, who used to inform him. On 26.8.1998, his sister had come to their house to take grass and respondent Kuldip Chand followed her as to why she had come without his permission and gave her beatings. She was rescued by his wife Asha Kumari and his brother�s wife Meena Devi. Respondent Kuldip Chand came back and they also sent his sister Sureshna. On 27.8.1998, he learned from his wife Asha kumari and his brother�s wife Meena Devi that Sureshna has been given beatings and has been taken to hospital. He went to Barsar where Sureshna was being treated in the private Clinic by respondent Kuldip Chand. He enquired from Sureshna and learnt that when she came back to her in-laws yesterday, she was again given beatings and as well as on the morning of 27.8.1998. She took some poisonous substance because of the beatings given by her husband. He took his sister to CHC Barsar, who died there on 29.8.1998. On this report, a case was registered and after investigation, police filed the challan before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barsar, District Hamirpur, who committed the case to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, who tried the respondent as detailed above, leading to his acquittal.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.

On appraisal of the record of the case, it is clear that the prosecution had examined 13 witnesses to substantiate its case. The most material statements can be said to be that of the complainant Mehar Chand, brother of the deceased, relatives and other witnesses.

The first statement is that of PW-1 Mehar Singh, brother of deceased and the complainant, who has stated that after one year of marriage, the accused started beating his sister on the pretext that no issue was born to her. She used to tell him about the beatings and the cause. On 26.8.1998, the deceased came to their house. The respondent followed her and started giving beatings as to why she has come to their house. His mother sent the deceased to her in-laws house. On that day, the accused gave beatings to his sister and she was rescued by his wife Asha Devi and Bhabi Meena. He stated that he was not present at that time. He was told by his wife when he returned home. On 27.8.1998, at about 5/5.30 P.M., when he was working as labourer at village Bhareri, his wife and Bhabi came to his place of work and told him that the accused has given beatings to the deceased, who has been taken to Barsar for treatment. He went to Barsar and found the deceased lying in private Clinic and the accused was also there. He enquired from his wife and learnt that the accused has given beatings to her, which was continued on the second day also and she took some poison. She was taken to CHC Barsar and got admitted there. He stated that the deceased told him at 7.00 P.M., while she was lying in the private Clinic that she had been beaten by her husband. The private practitioner was not present there at that time. He stated that when the deceased was taken to CHC Barsar, she was conscious and was talking. The police itself enquired from the deceased as to what happened to her on the same day when she narrated this fact to him, though it has come up in the statement of PW-12 Madan Kant Sharma that he had filed an application on the same day when the patient was not fit to make statement. This is contrary to the version given by the brother of the deceased that she has told to the police about this fact. No explanation is there on record as to why PW-12 did not record the statement of the brother of the deceased when she had been admitted in the hospital, that is, CHC Barsar and remained there for two days, but it is only when she died on 29.8.1998, he went there and recorded the statement of the brother of the deceased. This was the first version, which could have been given by the brother of the deceased prior to the death of his sister, which was not recorded by the police. He stated that he had not seen the marks of injuries on the person of the deceased on 26th/27th August, 1998. He stated that no dispute between accused and the deceased is in his knowledge except the cause given above that she was unable to bear a child for about 3 years.

The next relative examined is PW-3 Meena Devi. She has stated that the accused treated the deceased nicely for about two years and thereafter started maltreating her by giving beatings on the pretext that she was not capable to conceive child. She does not mention the date, month or year when she was told about the beatings or the cause and reference is to only one occurrence i.e. three days prior to death i.e. on 26.8.1998, she had come to their house, accused came there and gave beatings to her in her presence and Asha Devi and when they tried to rescue, they were also given beatings. This was never the case of PW-1 Mehar Singh that this witness was also given beatings apart from his wife and no medical report has been proved in this regard. She further stated that on 27.8.1998 when she and Asha Devi were returning from village Manot and reached near the house of the accused, at 5.00 P.M. she saw that accused was having stick in his hand and he was giving beatings with it to the deceased while she was lying on the ground and vomiting. She went near the deceased and the accused asked them to enquire from the deceased as to why she was not taking medicine and that he will drag the deceased with rope, which he was having in his hands and will throw the deceased in the �Nala�. No such version was told to PW-1 by this witness at that time and at that time, she was informed that the deceased had taken some poisonous because of maltreatment given to her. They went to village Bhareri where PW-1 was working and informed him, but he had never told about this exact version as told by this witness. She stated that the accused gave beatings to the deceased for about 20-25 minutes in their presence. The stick was 4 feet long and 2 inch in dia, with which she was given the beatings with full strength. She stated that on 26.8.1998 when the deceased went to her in-laws house, she was accompanied by Madhu, daughter of Mehar Singh, her Jeth and when she returned in the morning, she stated that the accused has beaten the deceased in her presence. This was never corroborated by PW-1, because this is the only occurrence relied upon by the prosecution. She admitted that this version is not recorded in her police statement that Madhu had accompanied the deceased to her in-laws house. She was also confronted with her statement made to the police, in which she has not stated that the deceased was being given beatings by the accused with stick. She also stated that she told the Ward Panch about the beatings, but this does not find mention in the police statement. Asha Kumari, the other relative and wife of Mehar Singh, was not examined and was given up by the prosecution, though she was a material witness in regard to the beatings given to the deceased 1-2 days prior to her death.

The next witness examined is PW-2 Ramesh chand, who stated that he alongwith other persons were working as labourer in village Bhareri and wife of Puni Ram Smt. Meena Devi and his brother�s wife Asha Kumari came and told that the accused was giving beatings to Sureshna since she has taken poison. This was not the cause of beating that let the deceased to commit suicide, but the beating was allegedly given since she had taken the poison. He also stated that the accused was having rope in his hand and was proclaiming that the deceased will be strangulated. They went to Barsar and found the deceased admitted in private Clinic. Mehar Chand was informed by the deceased that the accused had given beating to her yesterday as well as in the morning, therefore, she had consumed poison. They brought the deceased and got her admitted in CHC Barsar. He was confronted with the portion of his police statement, in which a reference has been made to the rope, but it was not so recorded therein. He stated that earlier to that date he was never stated by Mehar Singh about the maltreatment given by the accused to the deceased, though they had been working together for the last 2-3 years.

The next witness is PW-7 Gulabu Ram, father of the deceased, who stated that the accused treated her nicely for two years and then started giving beatings to her that she is not able to conceive child. This deceased used to tell whenever she visited his house. She only advised his daughter to bear and the God will bless her with a child. He stated that one day prior consuming poison, the deceased came to their house, was followed by her husband, who gave beatings, but these were not given in his presence and he only heard from his daughter-in-law.

PW-8 Trilok Chand, a member of the Panchayat, has stated that when the deceased was at Barsar for medical treatment, Mehar Singh came to him and asked for money, which he required for his ailing sister at Barsar, but did not tell of her ailment. Mehar Singh never complained to him that the accused used to maltreat the deceased. He was declared as hostile and was allowed to be cross-examined by the learned P.P for the State.

Apart from the above, the prosecution has also proved the MLC of the deceased. When the deceased was examined by PW-5 Dr. H.R. Kalia, Medical Officer, at CHC Barsar, on 27.8.1998 at 8.15 P.M., she was unconscious, was vomiting and no external injury was seen by him on any part of the body. He was told that she has consumed some poison. In case injuries were inflicted upon her person on the evening of 26th, on the morning of 27th, with a long stick also, as has come up in evidence, this must have been noticed by the Medical Officer PW-5 Dr. H.R. Kalia, who does not state so. Even in the postmortem report Ext. PW4/A proved in evidence, no injuries were noticed by the Medical Officer.

It is, therefore, clear from the above discussion that the statement of the brother of the deceased Mehar singh has not been corroborated by his brother�s wife, PW-3 Meena Devi examined and his wife for the reasons best known to the prosecution was not examined, though she was a material witness. They referred to the injuries being inflicted on the person of the deceased for about 20-25 minutes with stick also, when she has been taken to CHC Barsar. The Medical Officer does not notice any injury. The detail of beatings given, has not been stated by any of the witnesses. No medical examination was ever got done by the relative of the deceased and no report whatsoever was made to the Panchayat or police or any other authority. The reason for beating is stated to be incapacity of the deceased to bear a child and that can be viewed as a reason for the deceased to commit suicide also, though this is the only possibility which cannot be ruled out being the reason for the suicide. The cause for immediate provocation can be said to be injuries inflicted to her on 26th or 27th, but they did not find corroboration from the medical evidence. The deceased remained admitted in the hospital from the evening of 27.8.1998 to 29.8.1998 when she died, but only one attempt was made by the police on 27.8.1998 itself and she was not found fit to make statement, but the police did not make any other attempt to record her statement or the statement of the brother of the deceased. Once the deceased was admitted in the hospital, his statement should have been recorded by the police before the death had taken place, but the police recorded the statement after the death of the deceased. On the basis of the oral as well as medical evidence led by the prosecution, the view drawn by the learned trial Court that the prosecution has failed to prove its case, cannot be said to be perverse, calling for an interference by this Court.

In view of the above discussion, we accordingly hold that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant, which is dismissed accordingly. The bail bonds furnished by the respondent shall stand discharged.