Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Virender Singh,Mansoor Ahmad Mir, JJ.
Mohan Lal & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 03/2003 c/w Confirmation No. 3/2003
Decided On : 01 October, 2007
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Sections 302/34 RPC and 498-A RPC - [302/34 RPC, 498-A RPC] - The court found the accused guilty of teasing, cruelty, and making unlawful demands of dowry, leading to the death of the deceased. The court relied on the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and the conduct of the accused to convict them under Section 498-A RPC. However, the court concluded that the injuries inflicted did not amount to murder under Section 302 RPC, but rather fell under Section 304 Part-II RPC, resulting in a custodial sentence of 9 years with a fine of Rs. 30,000.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased was married to the accused, who subjected her to cruelty, made unlawful dowry demands, and ultimately caused her death. The prosecution witnesses provided consistent evidence of the accused's behavior, and the accused failed to provide a specific defense.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of the offense under Section 498-A RPC based on the unshaken evidence of the prosecution witnesses. However, the court concluded that the injuries inflicted did not amount to murder under Section 302 RPC, but rather fell under Section 304 Part-II RPC, resulting in a custodial sentence of 9 years with a fine of Rs. 30,000.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the accused's treatment of the deceased, the demands for dowry, and the nature of the injuries inflicted, leading to the question of whether the offense fell under Section 302 RPC or Section 304 Part-II RPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the consistent evidence of the prosecution witnesses and the conduct of the accused to establish the offense under Section 498-A RPC. Additionally, the court considered the nature of the injuries and the conduct of the accused to determine that the offense fell under Section 304 Part-II RPC rather than Section 302 RPC.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction under Section 302 RPC and convicting the accused under Section 304 Part-II RPC, with a custodial sentence of 9 years and a fine of Rs. 30,000.
Introduction:
1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against judgment dated 18th of February, 2003 and order dated 20th of February, 2003 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu in a case tilled State v. Mohan Lal and others, in File No. 20/Sessisoris, instituted on 20.05.1998, whereby and where under appellant Nos. 1 and 2 came to be convicted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302/34 RPC and 498-A RPC and appellant No. 3 came to be acquitted for the charge framed against her under Sections 302/34 RPC and convicted under Section 498-A RPC.
Brief Facts:
2. Written report-EXPWRK came to be lodged by PW-1 Romesh Kumar brother of the deceased, in Police Station Kana Chak with the allegations that his sister namely Santosh Kumari deceased was married to Mohan Lal accused/appellant No. 1. Her mother-in-law, Shani Devi, brother-in-law, Guru Ram and Mohan Lal, husband accused/appellants were making demands of dowry, treating her with cruelty and were oftenly threatening her to leave the matrimonial house. Accused Mohan Lal is a BSF employee and whenever he used to visit the home, he was beating the deceased. The deceased was narrating all the facts to her mother, brother and other members of the family, but after persuasion they were sending her back. Mohan Lal accused in the month of February, 1998 had come on leave. He beat her, she went to her parental house and told to them. But they persuaded her and she went back. On 11th of March, 1998, Romesh Kumar, the brother along with his uncle Guchhu Ram went to the house of Mohan Lal at Dab Karam Din and persuaded the parents of the accused Mohan Lal. On 12th March, 1998 one person namely Gudu came from Dab Karam Din and informed them that deceased passed away. After they reached Dab Karam Din, deceased was taken for giving a last bath. Her mother found injuries on her body, arms, back and legs etc. During the night of 11th/12th of March, 1998 accused had tortured the deceased and beat her. This information report set the police in motion and police swung in to action. After completing the investigation, charge sheet came to be filed against all the three accused for the commission of offences punishable under Section 302/34 RPC and 498-A RPC. Accused-appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
3. Prosecution has examined PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-4, PW-5, PW-7, PW-8, PW-9, PW-10, PW-11, PW-12, PW-13, PW-15 & PW-16. Prosecution has failed to examined PWs-6, 17 and 18.
4. Witnesses namely Bansi Lal PW-12 and Romesh Kumar PW-13 have moved application under Section 540-Cr.P.C with the averment that they made false statements before the Court and their statements be recorded afresh. The said application came to be allowed and their statements came to be recorded on 29th of October, 2001 and 26th of November,2001 respectively. The statements of the accused came to be recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C. They have not taken any defence not to speak of a specific defence but made a simple denial.
5. Accused-appellants have examined three witnesses in defence namely Bhaga Singh, Nek Ram and Sansar Chand.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the impugned judgment came to be passed. It appears that State has not preferred any appeal against the impugned judgment whereby appellant accused No. 3. Shani Devi came to be acquitted for the commission of offences under Sections 302/34 RFC.
(iii) Evidence:
7. It is profitable to give a brief resume of the evidence of the prosecution hereunder:
PW-1, Romesh Kumar, brother of the deceased, has deposed that deceased was married to accused Mohan Lal and after 5/6 months of marriage accused started teasingher and treated her with cruelty and made demands for dowry. Accused Mohan Lal, husband of the deceased, is a BSF employee. Whenever he was coming on leave, he was beating the deceased and was making demands. One week prior to the occurrence, she visited the parental house after accused Mohan
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
