GURDEEP SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

Citation: [2011] 10 S.C.R. 655 · Decided: 25-08-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.S. BEDI, GYAN SUDHA MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 10 S.C.R. 655 
GURDEEP SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1085 of 2003) 
AUGUST 25, 2011 
[HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860: ss. 3048, 498A - Allegation of dowry 
death against appellant-husband, his brothers, parents and 
sisters - Allegation that all the accused administered poison C 
to the victim-deceased which resulted in her death - Trial 
court held the appellant and his parents guilty, however, 
acquitted his brothers and sisters - High Court upheld the 
conviction of appellant and ordered acquittal of his parents -
On appeal, held: The evidence with respect to the appellant 
D 
was almost identical with that of the six accused who were 
acquitted of the same charge - Allegation of poisoning was 
not substantiated as no poisonous substance was found in th&-
report of FSL - Mere fact that the victim was a young woman 
would not lead to inference that she had died an unnatural 
E 
death - Likewise, the evidence of demand for dowry or goods 
soon before death was also lacking - Indisputably, in order 
to attract s.3048, it is imperative on the part of the prosecution 
to establish that the cruelty or harassment has been meted 
out to the deceased 'soon before her death'- It must undergo 
F 
the test known as 'proximity test'- Evidence clearly failed the 
oroximity test - Courts below drew a presumption against the 
accused primarily on the plea that they had not informed the 
?arents of the deceased that she had died and had hurriedly 
cremated her dead body - Evidence of the brother and the 
father of the victim in the Court was that they had received 
G 
'70 information about the death - However, in their statements 
~ecorded uls.161, Cr.P.C. they had stated that they were 
oresent when the cremation took place - In order to explain 
this contradiction both these witnesses disowned their s. 161 
655 
H 
656 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011) 10 S.C.R. 
A statements and testified that they had not made any 
statement to the police - These statements were, however, 
falsified by the evidence of the police officer concerned, who 
deposed that the police statements were recorded by him as 
per the dictates of the two witnesses - Conviction liable to be 
B set aside - Appellant acquitted - Evidence Act, 1872 -
s.1138. 
c 
D 
E 
F 
Suresh Kumar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2009) 17 
sec 243: 2009 (7) SCR 1068 - relied on. 
Case Law Reference: 
2009 (7) SCR 1068 
relied on 
Para 5 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
No. 1085 of 2003. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.05.2002 of the 
High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal 
Appeal No. 667-SB of 2000. 
Sudhir Walia and Abhishek Atrey for the Appellant. 
Kuldip Singh, R.K. Pandey, H.S. Sandhu, K.K. Pandey and 
Mohit Mudgal for the Respondents. 
The following order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
1. This appeal arises out of the following facts: 
1.1 The appellant Gurdeep Singh was the husband of the 
G deceased Rajender Kaur. The couple had got married on the 
14th of October, 1989 and it is the case of the prosecution that 
a substantial amount of money far beyond the means of the 
bride's family had been spent at that time though the appellant, 
his parents, sisters and other relatives remained dissatisfied. 
H It appears that the demands for dowry continued unabated and 
GURDEEP SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 657 
about one year before the death the appellant demanded a sum 
A 
of '25,000/- for the purchase of a motorcycle, and this amount 
was indeed handed over to the appellant but was utilised for 
purchasing a plot instead. It is further the prosecution story that 
despite having received the aforesaid amount, the deceased 
continued to suffer at the hands of her husband and his 
B 
relatives and that despite the efforts of a panchayat in the matter 
no suitable result followed. It is further the prosecution story that 
the appellant and his relatives administered poison to Rajinder 
Kaur on the 27th July, 1995 which caused her death and that 
three days thereafter information was received by Gurdev Singh c 
P.W. 2, her brother, and Satnam Singh, P.W. 3 her father on 
which they alongwith others rushed to the matrimonial home of 
Rajinder Kaur but found that the dead body had been hurriedly 
cremated. Gurdev Singh P.W.2 thereupon gave an application 
Exhibit PB to the Station House Officer, Police Station, 
0 
Gidderbaha and on its basis a daily diary en

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.