1. Conviction under Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code — Appeal against conviction and sentence. (Para 5 )
Back
Next 
2023 Supreme(SC) 1118
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJIV KHANNA, BELA M. TRIVEDI, JJ.
Sanjay Babu Lal – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Review Petition (Criminal) No. 462 of 2023, Diary No. 8152 of 2023, Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7528 of 2018
Decided On : 08-11-2023
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
Dowry death and cruelty – Sentence can be reduced keeping in view mitigating circumstances of case.
Dowry death and cruelty – Sentence can be reduced keeping in view mitigating circumstances of case.
Subject
Criminal Law - Review of Conviction and Sentence
Act Referred
Headnote
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 304B and 498A – Dowry death and cruelty – Conviction and sentence – Review petition – Court not inclined to interfere with conviction of appellant – However, keeping in view facts and circumstances of case, including factum that appellant has a differently-abled son and incident is of year 2002, Court inclined to reduce punishment awarded to appellant from that of life imprisonment, to imprisonment for period already undergone, which is ten years and nine months approximately as on 03.10.2023 – However, appellant will pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default whereof, he will undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months – Sentence awarded under Section 498A of IPC maintained – Sentences will run concurrently. (Paras 5, 6 and 7)
Facts of the case:
As petitioner is confined to jail, delay of 1606 days in filing review petition is condoned.
Findings of Court:
On payment of fine/default sentence, appellant will be released immediately, if not required to be detained in jail in any other case.
Result : Appeal partly allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. D.N. Gobardhun, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Yugandhara Pawar Jha, AOR Mr. Kunal Verma, Adv. Ms. Lavanya Dhawan, Adv. Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AAG Ms. Srishti Mishra, Adv. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, Adv./AOR
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. D.N. Gobardhun, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Yugandhara Pawar Jha, AOR Mr. Kunal Verma, Adv. Ms. Lavanya Dhawan, Adv. Mr. Ashwin Kumar Nair, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AAG Ms. Srishti Mishra, Adv. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, Adv./AOR
Table of Contents
2. Challenge to conviction seeking acquittal and reduction of sentence based on trial records and personal circumstances. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 )
3. Evidence does not support acquittal, but mitigating factors including family circumstances and time elapsed justify reducing the sentence. (Para 5 , 6 )
4. Mitigating personal circumstances and the period of incarceration can justify the reduction of a sentence even when the conviction is maintained. (Para 6 )
5. Conviction maintained; sentence reduced to period already undergone with a fine; appeal partly allowed. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 )
6. Can delay in filing a review petition be condoned if the petitioner is incarcerated?
Yes, the court may condone significant delays in filing a review petition when the petitioner is confined to jail. (Para 1 )
7. On what grounds can a court reduce a sentence of life imprisonment to the period already undergone?
The court may reduce the sentence based on the facts and circumstances of the case, including the existence of a differently-abled dependent and the length of time since the incident. (Para 6 )
8. How are multiple sentences for different offences under the IPC typically served?
Sentences for different offences, such as those under Section 304B and Section 498A of the IPC, may be ordered to run concurrently. (Para 7 )
ORDER :
1. As the petitioner-Sanjay Babu Lal is confined to jail, delay of 1606 days in filing the review petition is condoned.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the review petition is allowed. The order dated 31.08.2018 is recalled and SLP (Crl.) No. 7528/2018 stands restored to its original number and file.
3. Leave granted in SLP (Crl.) No. 7528/2018.
4. We have perused the trial Court records with reference to the statement of Lt. Col. (Dr.) T.S. Bhatti (PW-11), the statement made by the appellant-Sanjay Babu Lal under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as also, Exhibits PQ (Medical Case Sheet), PR (Proceedings of Medico-legal case) and PV (Site Plan). We have also perused the photographs, which are marked as Exhibits PC to PE.
5. Having regard to the aforesaid photographs, we do not think that the appellant-Sanjay Babu Lal has made out a case for acquittal. We are not inclined to interfere with the conviction of the appellant-Sanjay Babu Lal for the offences punishable under Section 304B and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.1 [In short ‘IPC’.]
6. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, including the factum that the appellant-Sanjay Babu Lal has a differently-abled son and the incident is of the year 2002, we are inclined to reduce the punishment awarded to the appellant-Sanjay Babu Lal from that of life imprisonment, to imprisonment for the period already undergone, which is ten years and nine months approximately as on 03.10.2023. However, the appellant-Sanjay Babu Lal will pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), and in default whereof, he will undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. On payment of fine/default sentence, the appellant-Sanjay Babu Lal will be released immediately, if not required to be detained in jail in any other case.
7. The sentence awarded under Section 498A of the IPC is maintained. Sentences will run concurrently.
8. The appeal is partly allowed and disposed of in the above terms.
9. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
