Noida: An IRS officer and his parents were acquitted of dowry harassment and murder charges after five years. A local fast-track court found the woman’s death was by suicide and noted significant inconsistencies in the prosecution’s witness statements regarding dowry demands. Though the woman’s father claimed to have paid around Rs 45 lakh cash in dowry, the court held that the prosecution failed to substantiate the charges.Additional sessions Judge Saurabh Dwivedi said that prosecution completely failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the charges of dowry demand, dowry death, harassment, assault and threats to kill against the accused. “The accused, Aman Singla, Bina Rani and Mahendra Lal Singla, deserve to be acquitted of the charges levelled against them under sections 498A (cruelty for dowry), 304B (death linked to dowry within seven years of marriage), 323 (causing hurt voluntarily) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC, and the alternative charges of Section 302 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.”The court acquitted the three of all charges, directing them to furnish a personal bond of Rs 25,000 and one surety of the like amount each in compliance with Section 437A of CrPC.An FIR was filed on April 8, 2021, based on a complaint by Punjab resident Subhash Chandra, alleging that his son-in-law Aman Singla, an IRS officer, and his parents Mahendra Lal and Beena Rani harassed his daughter Heena over dowry and killed her by forcing her to consume medicines within six months of marriage.Chandra claimed that he spent around Rs 2.75 crore on his daughter’s marriage, which included giving Rs 15 lakh in cash, gold ornaments, an Innova Crysta car and a plot in Panchkula. He also said that the Singla family demanded Rs 2 crore in cash on the day of the marriage, which he was unable to give immediately, so he borrowed from relatives and paid Rs 30 lakh with the assurance that the balance amount would be given soon, following which the rituals were completed.He further claimed that on April 6 he visited his daughter her husband along with his wife and sister-in-law at their Noida residence to mediate between the two, but their their quarrel escalated and his son-in-law force-fed Heena some medicines, because of which she turned critical and was admitted to hospital, where she declared dead late on April 7.An FIR was registered and the three accused were arrested on April 9, 2021. The fast track court initially framed charges on Dec 1, 2021, and later framed additional charges under Sections 302/34 and 3/4 of DP Act on Dec 12, 2022.Prosecution presented 11 witnesses, including the plaintiff and five of his family members, whereas the defence produced five witnesses, including the accused Singla and his sister.Chandra’s family members supported his claims over the wedding expenses and the gifts given to Singla.Singla, however, refuted all claims and said that he spent 160 days in his matrimonial life before the death of his wife and of those 160 days, they stayed together for 125 days in Noida, where they had a peaceful life. He told the court his wife was an accomplished law student and that he used to guide her. He also claimed she was guided by her maternal aunt Meena Bansal, who is an advocate in Punjab and Haryana High Court, and lodged a premeditated case against them after the death of his wife.Having heard both sides, the court said that it was worth considering that if the deceased’s parents and aunt went to Noida on the accused’s call, why were the accused’s parents not informed of this fact? And why, despite arriving in Noida and seeing the girl’s deteriorating condition, did they not immediately take her to a police station or hospital? The court also noted the presence of an open kitchen at the accused’s flat, where the crime allegedly took place.“The most important witness here is the deceased’s aunt, a competent senior lawyer, and her omission makes the incident completely suspicious. In the presence of a walk-in kitchen, the possibility of harassing and drugging the victim becomes suspicious,” the court noted.The court noted that, as per statements made and evidence presented during the trial, there was no evidence indicating the accused demanded and collected Rs 30 lakh on the wedding day. It was also noted that a Panchkula plot that had allegedly caused contention between the married couple was jointly registered in the name of the accused and his late wife.“The prosecution has not produced any other evidence which clearly establishes that the deceased was harassed for dowry and that the harassment was done just before her death for dowry,” the court held.
