SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 69

2004(1) Supreme 518
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur)
Doraiswamy Raju & S.B. Sinha, JJ.
Moti Lal -Appellant
versus
State of M.P. (Now Chhattisgarh) -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 455 of 2003
Decided on 20-1-2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Shiv Sagar Tiwari, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Rudreshwar Singh and Prakash Shrivastava, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
No grievance can be made of non-compliance of provisions of Section 235(2) Cr.P.C. where minimum sentence under law has been awarded.

Headnote:(i) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 -Section 235-Hearing and order on sentence on the same day when conviction was recorded-No grievance could be made where minimum sentence under law had been awarded-Appellant was convicted u/s 498A and 306 IPC and sentence 3 years and 7 years respectively on same day-No case of appellant that he sought adjournment which was refused-Appellant could not make any legitimate grievance on the alleged non-compliance with Section 235(2) Cr.P.C. (Paras 5 and 6)

       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 306 and 498A-Deceased, wife of appellant, got married in 1976-77, committed suicide on 18-6-1985 in house of appellant-Conviction by trial Court and upheld by High Court-Appeal-Defence plea as to want of sufficient proof for demand of dowry and harassment and as to appellant being in possession of sufficient resources in Bank were considered and rejected for valid and relevant reasons-Ample material overwhelmingly supported the factual findings which were not shown vitiated for any infirmity-No interference was called for. (Para 7)

       

JUDGMENT

D. Raju, J.-The above appeal has been filed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Chhattisgarh High Court dated 30.1.2003 in Criminal Appeal No. 931 of 1989 wherein the learned Judge, while affirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant, dismissed his appeal.

2. The appellant, accused No. 1 in Sessions Trial No. 228 of 1985 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, then part of the Madhya Pradesh State, is the husband of one Shakuntla Bai @ Amrika Bai having been married to each other during the year 1976-1977. The second accused Surja Bai is the wife of Rajaram, the elder brother of the appellant. Rajaram, the elder brother, was said to be residing away from the Village being a Government Servant, leaving his wife to live in the joint family house in the village where the appellant was said to have also been living with his wife. The case of the prosecution was that the appellant used to harass his wife from the beginning on the ground that she had not brought sufficient dowry and often used to pester her to bring more gold and money from her father. Whenever she used to remind the appellant that the status and economic position of her father did not permit further dowry being given as demanded, the deceased used to be not only taunted and harassed but also threatened and beaten and at times even driven out of the house. In the month of December, 1984, the appellant appears to have called Suryamani, the elder brother of the deceased, and demanded payment of Rs. 3,000/- saying that if he really was interested in the welfare of his sister he must immediately pay the amount. The father of the deceased appears to have arranged for the money from his brother-in-law and through his son paid the sum to the appellant. About 3 or 4 months prior to the occurrence resulting in the death of Shakuntla Bai, the servant of the appellant appears to have, at the behest of the appellant, called the father of the deceased and when he went to the house of the appellant he told him that he did not want to keep his daughter any longer in the house and he may take her with him. On that, with great difficulties he was able to persuade the appellant and leave the deceased with her husband, in the house. Immediately thereafter during March-April when once the father of the deceased was in the house of his brother-in-law, the deceased was said to have come accompanied by a servant from the village where she was living, with broken utensils in a bag to her Uncle s house at Mahasamund, telling her father that her husband has broken all utensils saying that the brass utensils given by her father, instead of giving modern age steel utensils, have become old and, therefore, get them substituted with new stainless steel utensils. Her father, finding the pitiable condition of his daughter, has purchased new utensils from the shop at Mahasamund and sent her back with new utensils.

3. While matters stood thus, the ill-treatment and harassment by the appellant of his wife continued unabated also for further reason that she found out on many occasions the appellant having illicit relations with his Bhabhi Surja Bai. In the background of such events and strained relations, it appears that on 18.6.1985 in the marital home at the Village Deori the deceased consumed poison pesticide and died on the same day as a result thereof, in the house of the appellant. The vomiting made before her death, which the Police seems to have seized under a seizure memo Ex. P-7 and got tested also proved to contain pesticide. On coming to know of the occurrence at about 10.00 p.m. in the night, the father of the deceased filed the next day a written complaint to the Police on the basis of which an FIR was said to have been recorded and crime registered and investigation commenced. After completing the formalities of the investigation including the spot inspection, the seizure of the vomiting material and sending the same for laboratory











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top