KULDEEP KAUR versus STATE OF UTIARAKHAND

Citation: [2014] 10 S.C.R. 1100 · Decided: 17-10-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2014] 10 S.C.R. 1100 
KULDEEP KAUR 
v. 
STATE OF UTIARAKHAND 
(Criminal Appeal No. 2267 of 2014) 
OCTOBER 17, 2014 
[M.Y. EQBAL AND PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860: 
c 
s.306 - Abetment of suicide - Bride committing suicide 
in her matrimonial home within 4 months of marriage - No 
evidence regarding demand of dowry or harassment in that 
regard - Acquittal of appellant and all other accused persons 
of charges u/ss 498-A and 304 B - Conviction of appellant 
0 
u/s 306 - Evidence adduced as against appellant does not 
establish the case u/s 306 and, as such, her conviction is set 
aside. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
E 
HELD: 1.1. A perusal of trial court judgment 
pertaining to deceased's husband would show that PW1, 
father of .the deceased, in his cross-examination stated 
that no dowry was demanded by the accused persons 
from the day of alliance till solemnization of marriage. The 
F witness himself stated that only God knows why her 
daughter committed suicide without any reason. This 
witness has stated that it is true to say that neither the 
accused persons abetted his daughter to commit suicide 
nor had they harassed her. [para 16] [1106-H; 1107-A-C] 
G 
H 
1.2. The evidence adduced as against the appellant 
does not establish the case uls 306 of the Code. Having 
regard to the fact of the case and the evidence of the 
prosecution witnesses, the trial court acquitted all the 
1100 
KULDEEP KAUR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND 
1101 
accused persons except the appellant and the said 
A 
judgment was affirmed by the High Court. There is no 
strong reason to agree with the judgment of conviction 
passed by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court 
as against the appellant. The judgment of conviction of 
the appellant u/s 306 IPC is set aside. [para 17-18) [1107-
B 
D-F] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
No. 2267 of 2014. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 03.01.2013 in CRLA 
C 
No. 213/2006, of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital. 
Huzefa Ahmadi, Rajeev Sinha, Ranbir Singh Kundu, Rohan 
Sharma, Vishwa Pal Singh for the Appellant. 
Pankaj K. Singh, Rahul Verma (For Abhishek Chaudhary) 
D 
for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
M.Y. EQBAL, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. This appeal by special leave arises out of judgment and 
order dated 3.1.2013 of the High Court of Uttarakhand in 
Criminal Appeal No.213 of 2006, whereby Division Bench of 
E 
the High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant 
and affirmed the decision of the trial court convicting her under 
F 
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code to undergo three years 
rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/-. The High Court 
also dismissed the appeal preferred by the State against the 
judgment of acquittal passed by trial court. 
G 
3. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that on 6.6.2001 
the complainant of the case viz. Captain Jagtar Singh (PW1) 
lodged a report Ex.A-1 at P.S. Sitarganj, wherein it has been 
stated that marriage- of his -daughter Jagpreet Kaur was 
solemnized with Upkar Singh son of Harpal Singh on 1.3.2001. 
H 
1102 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 10 S.C.R. 
A The complainant gave the articles in the marriage according 
to his capacity, but in-laws of his daughter used to demand car 
etc. and used to taunt and harass his daughter. It was further 
complained that Jagpreet Kaur told the informant that her in-
laws harassed her on account of non-fulfillment of demand of 
B dowry and in the intervening night of 5th/6th of June, 2001, she 
was compelled to commit suicide. On the basis of this 
complaint, case was registered against the accused persons 
under Section 304-B, IPC and the police took into custody a 
small bottle, cover of which was slightly torned, on which 
c "Cypermethrin High Emulsifable Concentrate (Vet) Elitomin 100 
E.C." was written. Diary Ex.A-2 written by the deceased was 
also seized. Dead body was sent for post-mortem, where no 
apparent injury except ligature mark on the neck was found. 
According to the concerned Doctor, cause of death of the 
0 
deceased was due to asphyxia as a result of ante mortem 
hanging. 
4. Upon investigation, charge-sheet for the offence 
punishable under Section 304-B, IPC was submitted in the 
Court of Magistrate, who committed the case to the Court of 
E Sessions for trial. The trial court charged accused persons viz. 
mother-in-law Smt. Kuldeep Kaur and brothers-in-law Gurlal 
Singh & Rakesh Grover under S

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