Chellammal vs State Represented by the Inspector of Police

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 685

DIPANKAR DATTA, MANMOHAN
Chellammal – Appellant
Versus
State Represented by the Inspector of Police – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. N. Rajaraman, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. V.Krishnamurthy, Sr. A.A.G. Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AOR

JUDGMENT :

DIPANKAR DATTA, J.

1. This appeal, by special leave, assails the judgment and order dated 5th November, 2019¹ [impugned order] passed by a learned Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, partly allowing the appellants' criminal appeal² [Crl. Appeal No. 345/2012] under Section 374(2), Code of Criminal Procedure.³ [Cr.P.C.]

2. The two appellants, mother-in-law and husband, respectively, of the deceased were jointly tried⁴ [S.C. No. 37 of 2009] for commission of offences punishable under Section 304-B and Section 498A, Indian Penal Code.⁵ [IPC] The Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Coimbatore⁶ [Sessions Judge] vide its judgment and order dated 25th May, 2012, acquitted the appellants of the charge under Section 304-B, IPC but convicted them under Section 498-A, thereof. While the 1st appellant was sentenced to a year’s rigorous imprisonment, the 2nd appellant was sentenced to two years’ rigorous imprisonment. Both the appellants were sentenced to fine too.

3. The High Court, vide the impugned order, maintained the conviction of the appellants under Section 498A, IPC, together with the sentence of a year’s rigorous imprisonment imposed on the 1st appellant; however, the se