ROBIN PHUKAN
Suman Sharma @ Chuman Kr. Sharma, S/o. Sri Rajdeo Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Represented by P. P. Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Robin Phukan, J.) :
Heard Mr. S.R. Gogoi, learned counsel for the accused/appellant and Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1. Also heard Mr. N. Barman, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.
2. Judgment, dated 07.08.2023, and order of sentence, dated 08.08.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon, in Sessions Case No. 81/2017, is impugned in this appeal, under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C.
3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned Judgment dated 07.08.2023 and the order of sentence dated 08.08.2023, the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon (“trial Court”, for short) has convicted the accused/appellant Sri Suman Sharma @ Chuman Kr. Sharma, under Section 304B IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 8 years.
4. The background facts, leading to filing of the present appeal, are briefly stated as under:
Ashok Kumar vs. State of Haryana
Baljeet Singh and Anr. vs. State of Haryana
Balvir Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand
Bhakhar Ram and Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan
Ganeshlal v. State of Maharashtra
Hira Lal and Ors. vs. State (Govt. of NCT), Delhi
Kaliyaperumal v. State of T.N.
Major Singh v. State of Punjab
Mustafa Shahadal Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra reported in (2012) 11 SCC 397
Nika Ram v. State of H.P. (1972) 2 SCC 80
Parminder Kaur alias P.P. Kaur alias Soni vs. State of Punjab
Premchand vs. State of Maharashtra
Ram Badan Sharma vs. State of Bihar
Raman Kumar vs. State of Punjab
Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharati vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Reena Hazarika vs. State of Assam
Sanjiv Kumar vs. State of Punjab
Satbir Singh vs. The State Of Haryana reported in 2021 AIR 2021 SC 2627
Satvir Singh v. State of Punjab (2001) 8 SCC 633
Satyendra Kumar Gupta vs. State of Bihar
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra and Anr.
State of U.P. v. Dr. Ravindra Prakash Mittal (1992) 3 SCC 300
Thakkan Jha and Ors. vs. State of Bihar
Trimukh Maroti Kirkan vs. State of Maharashtra
Wazir Khan vs. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2023)8 SCC 597
The court upheld the conviction for dowry death under Section 304B IPC, establishing that harassment related to dowry demands occurred shortly before the victim's death, which was unnatural and withi....
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 304-B IPC, establishing that the deceased was subjected to cruelty for dowry demands, leading to her suicide, thus satisfying the legal requirements fo....
To sustain a conviction under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must establish a proximate link between dowry-related cruelty and the victim's death within seven years of marriage, demonstrating that....
The court upheld conviction for dowry death, emphasizing that evidence of torture and demand for dowry proven leads to presumption of causation under relevant legal provisions.
The prosecution must prove that the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands soon before her death to establish a case under Section 304B of the IPC; failure to ....
The prosecution must establish all ingredients of Section 304B IPC, including demand for dowry soon before death, to invoke presumption of guilt under Section 113B of the Evidence Act.
The central legal point established is the application of Section 304B of IPC and Section 113-B of the Evidence Act in cases of dowry death, emphasizing the need for proximity between cruelty/harassm....
The court ruled that to establish dowry death under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must show cruelty for dowry was inflicted soon before the victim's death, with a clear link between the two.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.