Ram Singh @ Ramu v. State of Punjab

INoTHEoHIGHoCOURToOFoPUNJABoANDoHARYANAoATo CHANDIGARH o CRA-D-1083-DB-2017o(O&M) DateoofoDecision:o04.07.2023 RAMoSINGHo@oRAMU ooo oooooo......oAppellant(s) Versus STATEoOFoPUNJABo ooooo.....oRespondent(s) CORAM:-ooHON'BLEoMRS.oJUSTICEoLISAoGILL HON'BLEoMRS.oJUSTICEooRITUoTAGORE Present:o Ms.oGaganoMohini,oAdvocateo o forotheoappellant. Mr.oM.S.oTiwana,oAAG,oPunjab. o ***** LISAoGILL,oJ.

1.o This o appeal o has o been o filed o challenging o judgment o dated

13.12.2016,opassedobyolearnedoAdditionaloSessionsoJudge,oFazilka,owhereby theoappellantohasobeenoconvictedoforotheooffenceopunishableounderoSection 304-BoofoIPCoandoorderoofoevenodate,owherebyotheoappellantohasobeen sentencedotooundergooimprisonmentotillotheoremainingoperiodoofohisolifeoand toopayofineoofo?10,000/-oandoinodefaultoofomakingopaymentoofofine,otoofurther undergoorigorousoimprisonmentoforoaoperiodoofooneoyear.ooo

¶2oBriefofactsonecessaryoforoadjudicationoofotheomatteroareothatoFIR No.65odatedo29.06.2015owasoregisteredoonotheobasisoofostatementoofoBaldev Singho(PW1),obrotheroofotheodeceased.ooBaldevoSingh,oagedoabouto24oyears, statedothatotheyowereothreeosiblings,otheocomplainantobeingoeldestoofoalloand GurdevoKauro@oGurmitoKauro(deceased)oyoungerotoohimoandoanotherosister, namelyoKailashoKauroyoungerotooalloofothem.ooHeostatedothatofouromonthsoago marriageoofohisoyoungerosisteroGurdevoKaurowasosolemnizedowithoRam Singho(appellant).ooAfteromarriage,oappellantoRamoSinghousedotoobeatoand harassohisosisteroonotheopretextoofobringingolessodowry.oHeofurtherostatedothat ono28.06.2015oatoabouto5:00oP.M.,oGurdevoKauro@oGurmitoKaur,ohisosister, called o him o on o his o mobile o bearing o no.76908-41871 o from o her o phone no.84270-86482.oSheodisclosedothatoherohusbandoRamoSinghowasobeating heroforonotobringingosufficientodowryoandothatoheomayokilloher.oUponohearing this,ocomplainantoalongwithohisouncleoKuldeepoSinghosonoofoLabhoSingh, afteroabouto15ominutesoproceededoonohisomotorcycleotoohisosister'sohome. Whenootheyoreachedooutsideotheomainogate,otheyoheardosomeonoiseoandosaw thatoRamoSinghowasostrangulatingotheocomplainant'sosisteroGurdevoKauroby puttingoaoDupattaoaroundoheroneck.oTheyoimmediatelyocalledohimooutoasoto whatoheowasodoing.ooRamoSinghoonoseeingotheocomplainantoandohisouncleois allegedotoohaveofledofromotheospot.ooComplainantofoundothatohisosisterowas dead.oTheotimeowasostatedotoobeoabouto7:00/7:30oP.M.ooComplainantocalled hiso parents oand ootherorelativeso telephonicallyoand onarrated o theo entire incident.ooHeowasoadvisedotoostayoatohisosister'soplace.ooParentsoandoother relativesoofoocomplainantocameotootheomatrimonialohomeoofotheodeceasedoin theomorningoandoafteroleavingothemoonotheospot,ocomplainantoalongwithohis uncleoKuldeepoSinghoproceededotooinformotheopolice.ooMotiveobehindothe occurrenceoisostatedotoobeodemandoofodowryobyoRamoSinghowithohisosister beingophysicallyoabusedoforonotobringingoaomotorcycleoinodowry.ooItoisostated thatotheyohadopacifiedoRamoSinghoearlieroalsoobutoRamoSinghohadoultimately killedotheirosisterobyostrangulatingoheroono28.06.2015.ooLegaloactionowas

¶3FormaloFIRoEx.P4/BowasoregisteredounderoSectiono304-BoIPC onotheobasisoofostatementoofoBaldevoSingh.oInvestigationowasoinitiated. Inquest o report o Ex.P4/C o was o prepared. o Rough o site o plan o Ex.P4/E o was prepared.ooStatementsoofowitnessesorecorded.oPostmortemoofotheodeceased wasoconducted.oPostmortemoreportoisoonorecordoasoEx.P5.ooAppellantowas arrestedoono01.07.2015.ooAfterocompletionoofoinvestigationofinaloreportounder Sectiono173oCr.P.C./challanowasopresentedoandotheocaseowasocommittedoto theoCourtoofoSessionsovideoorderodatedo09.10.2015.oChargeounderoSection 304-BoIPCowasoframedoagainstotheoappellant,owhoopleadedoinnocenceoand claimedotrial.o

4.o Prosecutionoinoorderotooproveoitsocaseoexaminedoasomanyoas sevenowitnesses.ooStatementoofotheoaccusedounderoSectiono313oCr.P.C.owas recordedowhereinoheodeniedoallotheoincriminatingoevidenceoagainstohimoand pleadedofalseoimplication.oOneowitnessonamelyoRameshosonoofoHarbansoSingh wasoexaminedoasoDW1oinodefenceobyotheoaccused/appellant.ooo

5.o LearnedotrialoCourtoonoconsideringotheoevidenceoonorecord,ofacts andocircumstancesoconcludedothatoprosecutionohadosuccessfullyoprovedoits case o against o the o appellant o beyond o reasonable o doubt. o Appellant o was, accordingly,oconvictedoforotheooffenceopunishableounderoSectiono304BoIPC andosentencedoasodetailedoinotheoforegoingoparas,ovideoimpugnedojudgment andoorderodatedo13.12.2016.oAggrievedotherefromotheoappellantohasofiledothis appeal.

¶6Learned o counsel o for o the o appellant o vehemently o argued o that learnedotrialoCourtohasogrosslyoerredoinolawoandoonofactsoinoconvictingothe appellantoforotheooffenceopunishableounderoSectiono304-BoIPCoandosentencing himotooimprisonmentoforolife.oItowasoarguedothatothereowasoinexplicableodelay inofilingoofoFIR,otherefore,opossibilityoofoembellishmentoisoveryomuchopresent. Incidentoinoquestionoisostatedotoohaveooccurredoatoabouto7:00/7:30oP.M.oon

28.06.2015owhereasoFIRowasoregisteredoono29.06.2015oatoabouto10:00oA.M. Furthermore,opresenceoofoallegedoeyewitnesses,oitoisosubmitted,oisohighly doubtfuloinasmuchoasoifotheyohadoinofactobeenopresentoonotheospot,oitowould notohaveobeenopossibleoforotheoappellantotoohaveofledofromotheospot. Moreover,oonceotheyodidoseeotheoappellantotryingotoostrangulateotheodeceased, itoisoopposedotooalloprobabilitiesothatotheyowouldonotohaveointervenedotootry andosaveoher.oo

¶7Learnedocounseloforotheoappellantoalsooarguedothatoocular evidenceoisoinconsistentowithotheomedicaloevidenceoonorecord.oAsoperothe postmortemoreport,othereoareonoosuchoinjuriesowhichowouldocorroborateothe prosecutionoversionothatocomplainant'sosisterowasophysicallyoabusedobyothe appellant.oFurthermore,ocomplainantostatedothatohisosisterowasodeadoatoabout 7:00/7:30oP.M.oOno28.06.2015,opostmortemoinothisocaseowasoconductedoon

29.06.2015oato3:00oP.M.obutoasoperopostmortemoreportoEx.P5,otheotime betweenodeathoandopostmortemoisostatedotoobeo16ohours,otherefore,otimeoof death o would o be o 11:00 o P.M. o and o not o 7/7:30 o P.M. o as o stated o by o the complainant.ooo

¶8Itowasoalsoocontendedothatothereoisonooevidenceoworthotheoname onorecordotooindicateothatosoonobeforeoherodeath,otheodeceasedowasosubjected toocrueltyoinorelationotoodemandoofodowry,otherefore,othereobeingonoodemand, thereowasonoomotiveoforotheomurderoofotheocomplainant'sosister.oConviction underoSectiono304BoIPC,othus,owasourgedotoobeounjustified.oEvidenceoon record,oitowasocontended,odidonotoinoanyomanneropointooutotooharassmentoof theodeceasedobyotheoappellant.oOraloevidenceoofotheointerestedowitnesses,oitois submittedoisonotosufficientoevidenceotooproveotheoprosecutionoversion. Moreover,oallegationsohaveobeenolevelledoonlyoagainstotheohusbandoandonot quaoanyootherofamilyomember,owhich oproves othatotheoallegationsoare incorrect.oFurthermore,onooevidence,oitowasocontended,othatocallodetail recordsoofotheocomplainantowereonotoplacedoonorecord,owhichowouldoreflect asotoowhetherotheodeceasedohadoindeedocalledotheocomplainantoandotheotime whenoparentsoandorelativesohadobeenocalledobyotheocomplainantoafterothe deathoofohisosister.oItoisothusoprayedothatothisoappealobeoallowed.oJudgment andoorderoofosentenceodatedo13.12.2016opassedobyolearnedoAdditional SessionsoJudge,oFazilkaoobeosetoasideoandotheoappellantobeoacquittedoofothe chargeoframedoagainstohim.o

9.o LearnedocounseloforotheoSate,otootheocontraryohadoarguedothatothe impugnedojudgmentoandoorderodatedo13.12.2016oisoaowelloreasonedooneobased onoproperoandosoundoappreciationoofotheoevidenceoonorecord.ooAlloingredients ofoSectiono304-BoIPCohaveobeenoprovedoonotheobasisoofoevidenceoonorecord.oIt is,othus,oprayedothatothisoappealobeingodevoidoofoanyomeritobeodismissed.

¶10Weoheardolearnedocounseloforotheopartiesoandoperusedotheorecord withotheiroableoassistance.

11.o Atotheooutset,oitoisogainfulotooreferotootheoprovisionsoofoSection 304-BoIPC,owhichoreadsoasounder:- "304B.oDowryodeath.―

(1)oWhereotheodeathoofoaowomanoisocausedobyoanyoburnsoor bodily o injury o or o occurs o otherwise o than o under o normal circumstancesowithinosevenoyearsoofoheromarriageoandoitois shownothatosoonobeforeoherodeathosheowasosubjectedotoocruelty oroharassmentobyoherohusbandooroanyorelativeoofoherohusband for,ooroinoconnectionowith,oanyodemandoforodowry,osuchodeath shallobeocalledo"dowryodeath",oandosuchohusbandoororelative shallobeodeemedotoohaveocausedoherodeath.o Explanation.―Forotheopurposeoofothisosub-section,o"dowry" shallohaveotheosameomeaningoasoinosectiono2oofotheoDowry ProhibitionoAct,o1961o(28oofo1961).

(2)oWhoeverocommitsodowryodeathoshallobeopunishedowith imprisonmentoforoaotermowhichoshallonotobeolessothanoseven yearsobutowhichomayoextendotooimprisonmentoforolife."

¶12ItoisofurtheropertinentotooreferotooSectiono113-BoofotheoIndian EvidenceoAct,o1872owhichoreadoasounder:-oo "113B.oPresumptionoasotoodowryodeath.―Whenotheoquestionois whetheroaopersonohasocommittedotheodowryodeathoofoaowoman andoitoisoshownothatosoonobeforeoherodeathosuchowomanohas beenosubjectedobyosuchopersonotoocrueltyooroharassmentofor,oor inoconnectionowith,oanyodemandoforodowry,otheoCourtoshall presumeothatosuchopersonohadocausedotheodowryodeath. Explanation.―Forotheopurposesoofothisosection,o"dowryodeath" shallohaveotheosameomeaningoasoinosectiono304B,oofotheoIndian PenaloCode,o(45oofo1860)."

13.oo Hon'ble oSupremeo Court oin o oKalia o Perumal oVs. oStateo of Tamilnadu,o2003oSCo3828oandoKashmiroKauroVs.oStateoofoPunjab,oAIR 2013oSCo1039oandoaonumberoofootherocasesohasoheldothatotheopresumption againstotheoaccusedoshallobeoraisedoonlyoonoproofoofotheofollowingoessential ingredientsobeingopresent:-

(i) thatotheowomanohasometoanounnaturalodeath,

(ii)owithinosevenoyearsoofoheromarriage,o

(iii)o thatosheowasosubjectedotoocrueltyooroharassmentobyoher husbandooroanyorelativeoofoherohusband,

(iv)o inoconnectionowithoanyodemandoofodowryosoonobeforeoher deathoand

(v)othatocrueltyoandoharassmentometedooutotooherocontinuedotoohave aocausaloconnectionooroliveolinkowithotheodemandoofodowry.

14.o Inotheopresentocase,oitoisoevidentofromotheopostmortemoreport thatocomplainant'sosisterodiedoanounnaturalodeath.ooPW7oDr.oSudhiroPathak, MedicaloOfficer,oCiviloHospital,oAbohar,owhooalongwithoDr.oAmanoNagpal andoDr.oYudhishteroChaudharyoconductedotheopostmortem,ostatedothatothe followingoinjuriesowereopresent:- "Neck,oa)oLigatureomarkopresentoonotheofrontoandoleft sideoofoneck,o18ocmoinolengthoando1?ocmoinobreadth absentoatotheobackoandorightoside.oNoomarkoofoknot seen. o Larynx o and o trachea o contused, o submucosal hemorrhageopresentoandopetichaeowasopresent,obrowoto redocolouroonotheofrontoofoneckoandosideoandoclavicular region. Onodissectionoofoneckounderlyingotissueocontused, bleedingopresentounderoneck. Neckomuscleocontused, Hyoidoboneofractured, Fractureoofotrachealoringopresent."

15.o Itoisoopinedothatocomplainant'sosisterodiedoanounnaturalodeath dueotooasphyxiaocausedobyostrangulationowithosufficientoforceotooresultoin instantodeathoinoordinaryocircumstances.oItoisofurtherostatedothatoprobable timeobetweenoinjuryoandodeathowasoinstantaneousoandoprobableotimeobetween death o and o postmortem o examination o was o 16 o hours. o Therefore, o it o is establishedothatotheocomplainant'sosisterodiedoanounnaturalodeath.

16.o ItoisospecificallyostatedobyoPW1oBaldevoSinghothatomarriageoof hisoyoungerosistero(deceased)owasosolemnizedowithotheoappellantoRamoSingh aboutofouromonthsopriorotootheoincident.oThereoisonoodenialoofotheosameoand thisoinofactoisoadmitted.oDeathoofotheocomplainant'sosisteroadmittedlyotook placeoinotheomatrimonialohome.oPW1oBaldevoSinghohasocategoricallyostated thatodeceasedowasosubjectedotoophysicaloabuseoandoharassmentoatotheohands ofotheoappellantoinoconnectionowithodemandoofodowry.oTheoappellantois statedotoohaveoharassedotheodeceasedoforonotohavingobroughtoanyodowryoand heowasodemandingoaomotorcycle.oThisohasobeenosoostatedobyotheocomplainant asowelloasoPW2oKuldeepoSingh,ouncleo(Chacha)oofotheocomplainantoandothe deceased.oHeotooocategoricallyostatedothatotheoappellantoafteromarriage startedodemandingoomotorcycleofromoGurdevoKauroandoalsooharassedoheroon accountoofodowry.

17.o Theo argumento thatoPW1o andoPW2o areo interestedo witnesses, therefore,otheirotestimonyocannotobeoreliedoupon,oisoanoargumentodevoidoof merit.oLearnedocounseloforotheoappellantowasounableotoopointooutoanyoevidence onorecordotooimpeachotheocredibilityoofosaidowitnesses,owhooareotheomostonatural witnessesoinotheogivenocircumstances.oReferenceobyolearnedocounseloforothe appellantotootheostatementoofoBaldevoSingho(hisocross-examination)othatothey hadonotoyetogivenodowryotootheodeceasedobutowereosupposedotoogiveoitoyet, cannotobeoofoanyoavailotootheoappellant.ooPW1ohasotruthfullyostatedothatoatothe timeoofomarriage,odowryowasonotogivenowithotheounderstandingothatotheyowould giveoanoalmirah,otelevision,obed,osewingomachine,oironoboxo(Peti)oandoother householdoarticlesolater.ooThisoinofactocementsotheoprosecutionoversionothatothe appellantoafteromarriageoactuallyostartedoharassingotheodeceasedoforodowry, whileoalsooraisingotheodemandoforoaomotorcycle.

18.oo Similarlyonoobenefitocanobeoderivedobyotheoappellantofromothe statementoofoPW1otootheoextentothatotheyohadonotoconvenedoanyoPanchayat beingoaofamilyoaffair,oforotheosimpleoreasonothatoitowasoonlyofouromonthsosince marriageoofotheodeceasedowithotheoappellant.oTherefore,oitoisoimmensely probableoandopossibleothatoatothisonascentostageotheofamilyowasotryingotooresolve theomatteroonoitsoownowithoutoinvolvingothirdopersons.oThus,oitoisosuccinctly provedofromotheoevidenceoonorecordothatodeceasedowasosubjectedotoodemandoof dowryoimmediately/soonobeforeoherodeath.

¶19Onceotheofoundationalofactsohaveobeenoprovedobyotheoprosecution, theoburdenoindeedoshiftsouponotheoaccusedoasoinotheopresetocase,okeepingoinoview theospecificoprovisionsoofolawoinorespectotoodowryodeath.oHon'bleoSupreme CourtoinoBansioLaloVs.oStateoofoHaryanao2011(11)oSCCo359,oreiteratedothat presumptionounderoSectiono113-BoofoEvidenceoActohasotoobeomandatorily appliedoonceoingredientsoofoSectiono304-BoIPCoareoestablished.oItowasoheldothat "19.oItomayobeomentionedohereinothatotheolegislatureoinoitsowisdomohasoused theowordo"shall"othus,omakingoaomandatoryoapplicationoonotheopartoofothe courtotoopresumeothatodeathohadobeenocommittedobyotheopersonowhoohad subjectedoherotoocrueltyooroharassmentoinoconnectionowithoanyodemandoof dowry.oItoisounlikeotheoprovisionsoofoSectiono113-AoofotheoEvidenceoAct whereoaodiscretionohasobeenoconferredouponotheocourtowhereinoitohadobeen providedothatocourtomayopresumeoabetmentoofosuicideobyoaomarriedowoman. Therefore,oinoviewoofotheoabove,oonusoliesoonotheoaccusedotoorebutothe presumptionoandoinocaseoofoSectiono113-BorelatableotooSectiono304-oBoIPC, theoonusotooproveoshiftsoexclusivelyoandoheavilyoonotheoaccused.oTheoonly requirementsoareothatodeathoofoaowomanohasobeenocausedobyomeansoother thanoanyonaturalocircumstances;othatodeathohasobeenocausedoorooccurred withino7oyearsoofoheromarriage;oandosuchowomanohadobeenosubjectedoto crueltyooroharassmentobyoherohusbandooroanyorelativeoofoherohusbandoin connectionowithoanyodemandoofodowry.

20.oTherefore,oinocaseotheoessentialoingredientsoofosuchodeathohaveobeen establishedobyotheoprosecution,oitoisotheodutyoofotheocourtotooraiseoa presumptionothatotheoaccusedohasocausedotheodowryodeath.oItomayoalsoobe pertinentotoomentionohereinothatotheoexpressionosoonobeforeoherodeathohas notobeenodefinedoinoeitheroofotheostatutes.oTherefore,oinoeachocase,otheoCourt hasotooanalyzeotheofactsoandocircumstancesoleadingotootheodeathoofothe victimoandodecideoifothereoisoanyoproximateoconnectionobetweenothe demandoofodowryoandoactoofocrueltyooroharassmentoandotheodeath."

20.ooo o ThisopositionowasoagainoreiteratedobyotheoHon'bleoSupremeoCourt inoSatbiroSinghoandoanotheroVs.oStateoofoHaryanaoinoCriminaloAppealsoNo. 1735-36oofo2010,odecidedoono28.05.2021.oThus,oitowasoincumbentouponothe deceasedotoorebutotheopresumptionoofocausality.oUnnaturalodeathoofothe complainant'sosisteroadmittedlyotookoplaceoinotheomatrimonialohomeowithinofour monthsoofomarriage.oThereoisonooevidenceoworthotheonameotoorebutothe presumptionoagainstotheoappellant.oAtothisostageoweotakeonoteoofotheodefenceoset upobyotheoappellant.oInohisostatementounderoSectiono313oCr.P.C.,oappellant statedothatoono28.06.2015oparentsoofotheodeceasedovisitedohisohouseowhenohe wasooutoofostationoandomurderedohisowifeoandoitoisoinoconnivanceowithotheolocal policeothatoheowasofalselyoimplicatedoinotheocase.ooHeofurtherostatedothatothere wasoaodisputeobetweenotheodeceased,oherobrotheroandoparents.oTheodeceased,oit isostated,ousedotooseekoheroshareoinotheofamilyopropertyoandoevenousedoto proclaimothatoinocaseoherofatheroandobrotherodidonotogiveoheroshareoinothe property,osheowouldotakeoupotheomatterowithotheoPanchayatoofotheovillageoandoat theopoliceostation.oFatheroandobrotheroofotheodeceasedowereoclaimedotoobeoafraid ofobeingoinsultedoinotheoPanchayatoandotherefore,ohadostrainedorelationsowith her.o

¶21Thisodefenceoisonotoworthyoofoanyocredenceoforotheosimpleoreason thatoPW1oinohisocross-examinationostatedothatoheoworkedoasoaomasonoforomarble workoandohisofatherowasoaolaboureroandothatotheyodidonotoownoanyoland/property whatsoever.oPW2,oKuldeepoSingh,ouncleo(Chacha)oofotheocomplainantoand deceasedoalsoostatedothatoheowasoaolabourer.oNooevidenceohasobeenoledobyothe defenceotooindicateothatobrotheroandoparentsoofotheodeceasedowereoownersoofoany property,owhichocouldobeosharedobetweenothemoandotheodeceased.oTherefore, theoappellantohasofailedotoodischargeotheoburdenoplacedouponohim.

¶22TheosoocalledodelayoinolodgingoofoFIRoisonotofataloinotheogiven circumstances.ooIncidentoisostatedotoohaveooccurredoatoabouto7:00/7:30oP.M.oon

28.06.2015.ooItoisosuccinctlyoexplainedobyotheocomplainantothatoheoinformedohis parentsoandootherorelativesoimmediatelyoaboutotheodeathoofoGurdevoKaur. Parentsoandootherorelativesoreachedotheomatrimonialohomeoatoabouto1:00oA.M.oat nightoandoitoisothereafter,othatotheoFIRowasolodgedoono29.06.2015oato10:00oA.M. PW1oinohisocross-examinationohasocategoricallyostatedothatoheohadonotocalled anyopersonofromotheoadjoiningovillagesooroDhanisoono28.06.2015obecauseoheodid notoknowoanyopersonofromotheosaidovillagesoor oDhanis.oDelay,oifoatoallois succinctlyoexplainedobyotheocomplainantoandoisonotofatalotootheoprosecutionocase inoanyomanner.oArgumentoraisedoonobehalfoofotheoappellantothatooneoDupattaois allegedotoohaveobeenorecoveredofromotheopossessionoofotheoaccusedowhereas Dupattaoofotheodeceasedowasofoundoonotheobodyoatotheotimeoofoconducting postmortemoneedonotodetainothisoCourt,oforotheoreasonothatoitoisonotoessentialoand neitheroisoitotheocaseoofotheoprosecutionothatodeceasedowasobeingostrangulated withotheovery oDupatta,owhichosheowasowearing.oSimilarly,otheofactothat allegationowasoraisedoonlyoquaotheoappellantoandonotoagainstoanyootheromember ofohisofamilyopointsotootheotruthfulnessoofotheoprosecutionoversionoandonot otherwise.oooo

¶23Argumentoraisedobyolearnedocounseloforotheoappellantothatoocular versionoisonotocorroboratedobyotheomedicaloevidence,oisoalsoodevoidoofoany merit.oMuchostressohasobeenolaidouponotheoopinionoregardingotimeoofodeathoof GurdevoKauroinasmuchoasoitoisostatedothatoinocaseotheodeathohadoindeedotaken placeoato7:30oP.M.oono28.06.2015,othereowasonoooccasionoforotheoBoardoof doctorsotooopineothatotimeobetweenodeathoandopostmortemowaso16ohoursoand furthermoreoallegationothatodeceasedowasobeingobeaten,oisonotoborneooutofromo theopostmortemoreport,owhichoshowsonoootheroinjuriesoexceptoaroundotheoneck. Inoouroconsideredoopinionotheo'probableotime'oofodeathogivenoinotheopostmortem reportooroabsenceoofootheroinjuriesobyoitselfoisonotosufficientotoorebutothe prosecutionoagainstotheoappellant.oItoisocorrectlyoobservedobyotheolearnedotrial Courtothatophysicaloabuseocanoalsoobeobyowayoofoslappingoaopersonoorosucholike acts,owhichomayonotoleaveoanyomarksoofoinjuryoonotheobody.oFurthermoreothe argumentothatoevenoinocaseoofostrangulation,osomeomarksoofostruggleoshouldobe present,oisodevoidoofoanyomerit.oInoModi'soTextbookoofoMedicaloJurisprudence andoToxicology,othereoisonothingotoosuggestothatoasoaoruleoinocasesoof 'strangulationooro'throttling',osignsoofostruggleoshouldobeopresent.oInoParikh's Textbook o of o Medical o Jurisprudence, o Forensic o Medicine o and o Toxicology (EighthoEdition),oitoisoopinedoatopageono.194oasounder:- o 'Inoanoadult,osignsoofostruggleoareousuallyopresent,obutoifotheothroatois seizedoandofirmlyocompressed,otheovictimocannotostruggle.'

24.ooo Thus,oinoviewoofoclear,ocogentoandoconvincingotestimoniesoofothe witnessesoandoevidenceoonorecord,otheoaboveosaidodoesonotocreateoaodentoinothe prosecutionoversion.o

¶25Keeping o in o view o the o clear o and o cogent o evidence o on o record culpabilityoofotheoappellantoinotheoheartlessocommissionoofotheooffenceounder Sectiono304-BoIPC,oisoclearlyo borneoouto fromotheoevidenceoono record. Complainant'sosisterowasodoneotoodeathobyostrangulatingoherowithoaoDupatta merelyowithinoaboutofouromonthsoofoheromarriageoonoaccountoofodowry.

26.o Learnedocounseloforotheoappellantoisounableotoopointooutoany evidenceoonorecordowhichoindicatesothatotheoimpugnedojudgmentodated

13.12.2016,opassed obyolearnedoAdditional oSessionsoJudge,o Fazilka,o is perverseoorosuffersofromoanyoinfirmityooroillegality,owhichocallsoforoany interferenceobyothisoCourtoinoconvictionoofotheoappellantounderoSectiono304-BoIPC.oooo

¶27Atothisostage,oweotakeonoteoofotheoalternateoprayeroaddressedoby learnedocounseloforotheoappellantoinorespectotooquantumoofopunishmentotoothe extentothatosentenceoshouldobeoreducedofromothatoofoimprisonmentoforoentire remainingoperiodoofoappellant'solife.oItowasosubmittedothatoappellantowasoonly twentyosevenoyearsoofoageoatotheotimeoofotheoincidentoandothatoheoisonot involvedoinoanyootherocase.oTheopresentoisonotosuchoanoextraordinaryomatter whereinooffenceowasocommittedoinoaodiabolicomannerotooinviteosuch sentence.o

28.o ItoisorelevantotooreferotootheojudgmentoofotheoHon'bleoSupreme CourtoinoHemoChandoVersusoStateoofoHaryanao(94)o6oSCCo427,owherein theoHon'bleoSupremeoCourtowhileonotingothatominimumosentenceoofoseven yearsoisoprovidedoforotheooffenceopunishableounderoSectiono304Bowhichomay extendotooimprisonmentoforolife,otheolatteroshouldobeoawardedoinorareocases andonotoinoeveryocase.oGainfuloreferenceoinothisoregardocanoalsoobeomadeoto theojudgmentoofotheoHon'bleoSupremeoCourtoinoSuniloDuttoSharmaoversus Stateo(GovernmentoofoNCToofoDelhi)o2014(4)oSCC(Crl.)o788,owherein whileodiscussingotheoprinciplesoofosentencingoinotheocaseoofoconvictions underoSectiono302oIPC,oitowasoheldothatosuchoprinciplesoasoevolvedooverothe yearsoareoapplicableotooallolesserosentences,oprovidedotheosentencingojudgeois vestedowithodiscretionotooawardoaolesseroorohigherosentence.oApplicabilityoto thoseofoundoguiltyounderoSectiono304-BoIPC,owasoalsoodetermined.oItowas heldothat:- "Toorevertotootheomainostreamoofotheocase,oweoseeonooreasonoas toowhyotheoprinciplesoofosentencingoevolvedobyothisoCourtoover the years through largely in the context of the death penalty will not be applicable to all lesser sentences so long as the sentencing judge is vested with the discretion to award a lesser or a higher sentence resembling the swing of the pendulum from the minimum to the maximum. In fact, we are reminded of the age old infallible logic that what is good to one situation would hold to be equally good to another like situation. Beside paragraph 163 (underlined portion) of Bachan Singh (supra), reproduced earlier, bears testimony to the above fact. Would the above principles apply to sentencing of an accused found guilty of the offence under Section 304-B inasmuch as the said offence is held to be proved against the accused on basis of a legal presumption? This is the next question that has to be dealt with. So long there is credible evidence of cruelty occasioned by demand(s) for dowry, any unnatural death of a woman within seven years of her marriage makes the husband or a relative of the husband of such woman liable for the offence of "dowry death" under Section 304-B though there may not be any direct involvement of the husband or such relative with the death in question. In a situation where commission of an offence is held to be proved by means of a legal presumption the circumstances surrounding the crime to determine the presence of aggravating circumstances (crime test) may not be readily forthcoming unlike a case where there is evidence of overt criinal acts establishing the direct involvement of the accused with the crime to enable the Court to come to specific conclusions with regard to the barbarous or depraved nature of the crime committed. The necessity to combat the menace of demand for dowry or to prevent atrocities on women and like social evils as well as the necessity to maintain the purity of social conscience cannot be determinative of the quantum of sentence inasmuch as the said parameters would be common to all offences CRA-D-1083-DB-2017o(O&M)ooo -1:- under Section 304-B of the Penal Code. The above, therefore, cannot be elevated to the status of acceptable jurisprudential principles to act as a rational basis for awarding varying degrees of punishment on a case to case basis. The search for principles to satisfy the crime test in an offence under Section 304-B of the Penal Code must, therefore, lie elsewhere. Perhaps, the time spent between marriage and the death of the woman; the attitude and conduct of the accused towards the victim before her death; the extent to which the demand for dowry was persisted with and the manner and circumstances of commission of the cruelty would be a surer basis for determination of the crime test. Coupled with the above, the fact whether the accused was also charged with the offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code and the basis of his acquittal of the said charge would be another very relevant circumstance. As against this the extenuating/mitigating circumstances which would determine the "criminal test" must be allowed to have a full play. The aforesaid two sets of circumstances being mutually irreconcilable cannot be arranged in the form of a balance sheet as observed in Sangeet (supra) but it is the cumulative effect of the two sets of different circumstances that has to be kept in mind while rendering the sentencing decision. This, according to us, would be the correct approach while dealing with the question of sentence so far as the offence under Section 304-B of the Penal Code is concerned." oo2;. 7n oSunil o *utt o Sharma+so &ase o (s+pra)$ o senten&e o o' o l#'e #/pr#son/ento'orot"eoo''en&eop+n#s"a-leo+ndero(e&t#ono306-Bo7PCo*as &on%ertedotoooneo'oroteno1earsCor#!oro+so#/pr#son/ento5eep#n!o#no%#e*ot"e a!eoo'ot"eo&on%#&to(21o1ears)o"a%#n!onoo&r#/#naloante&edentso*#t"ono e@traord#nar1oper%erseoa&toono"#sopart.

30.o Inotheopresentocase,odeathoofocomplainant'sosisterotookoplace withinoaboutofouromonthsoofoheromarriageowithotheoappellantowhoowasoabout twentyosevenoyearsoofoageoatothatotime.oAppellant,oasoperotheocustody certificateofurnishedobeforeousoisonotoinvolvedoinoanyootherocriminalocase.oNo extraordinaryoperverseoorodiabolicoactoonotheopartoofotheoappellantoisoapparent onorecord.ooKeepingoinoviewotheofactsoandocircumstancesoofotheomatter,owhile notofindingoanyogroundotooreduceotheosentenceotooteno(10)oyears,oinoour consideredoopinion,otheoendsoofojusticeoshallobeometoinocaseotheosentence imposed ouponotheoappellantoisoreducedofromoimprisonmentoforoentire remainingoperiodoofohisolifeotoorigorousoimprisonmentoforotwentyoyears.oThe sentenceoofofineoisomaintained.oAppellant,owhooisoinocustody,otooundergoorest ofotheoimprisonmentoinotermsoofothisodecision.

31.ooo Noootheroargumentohasobeenoraised.

32.oo Presentoappealowithoabovesaidomodificationoinosentenceois accordingly,odismissed. o (LISAoGILL) o ooooJUDGEoo o oooo(RITUoTAGORE)

04.07.2023o ooooJUDGEo Sunil Whetherospeaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whetheroreportable: Yes/Noooo