Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Arvind Kumar Mishra-I, Gautam Chowdhary, JJ.
Mohd Ishaq And Others – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1852 of 1991
Decided On : 13-02-2020
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 125, 437 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 304B, 201, 498A – Dowry Prohibition Act – Section 3, 4 – Indian Evidence Act – Section 113B – daughter of the informant was married to Mohd. Ishaq – but she was thrown out from her in-laws' house, therefore, she filed a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. – Sessions Judge allowed to take his wife back to his home –neighbour of informant came to him and told that informant's daughter expired and this death has been caused on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand and consequent perpetration of cruelty and in order to cause disappearance of evidence, she was buried – Request was made for lodging the report and taking appropriate action –Trial Judge, after appraisal of facts and consideration of merit of case and evaluating the evidence on record, returned aforesaid finding of conviction and awarded sentence vide impugned judgment and order– Held, Finding of conviction recorded by the trial court is on the face erroneous and perverse and the same cannot be sustained in the eye of law – Therefore, judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by Special Judge, is hereby set aside – Accused-appellants are acquitted of all charges as above –Appeal allowed (Para 36).
Facts of Case
Daughter of the informant was married to Mohd. Ishaq – but she was thrown out from her in-laws' house, therefore, she filed a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. – Sessions Judge allowed to take his wife back to his home –neighbour of informant came to him and told that informant's daughter expired and this death has been caused on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand and consequent perpetration of cruelty and in order to cause disappearance of evidence, she was buried – Request was made for lodging the report and taking appropriate action –Trial Judge, after appraisal of facts and consideration of merit of case and evaluating the evidence on record, returned aforesaid finding of conviction and awarded sentence vide impugned judgment and order.
Findings of Court:
Finding of conviction recorded by the trial court is on the face erroneous and perverse and the same cannot be sustained in the eye of law – Therefore, judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by Special Judge, is hereby set aside – Accused-appellants are acquitted of all charges as above.
Result: Appeal allowed
JUDGMENT :
1. Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellants is present.
2. By way of instant criminal appeal, challenge has been made to the validity and sustainability of the judgment and order of conviction dated 24.09.1991 passed by Special Judge, Moradabad, in Session Trial No.411 of 1987, State of U.P. Vs. Mohd. Ishaq and others, arising out of Case Crime No.82 of 1987, under Sections 304B, 201, 498A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Behjoi, District-Moradabad, whereby the surviving appellant nos.2 and 3 has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 304B I.P.C., five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 I.P.C., two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 498A I.P.C. and two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
3. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the surviving appellant nos.2 and 3 Mohd. Mushtaq and Mohd. Asghar, Sri Krishna Pahal, learned A.A.G. assisted by Sri Om Narain Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of this appeal.
4. Relevant facts of this appeal, as gathered from record, appear to be that Haji Mian Jan, informant PW-1 lodged the written report at Police Station Behjoi, District Moradabad (now District Sambhal) against the present appellants and his family members regarding fact that Khurshida Begum, daughter of the informant was married to Mohd. Ishaq some time ago but she was thrown out from her in-laws' house, therefore, she filed a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the court below wherein maintenance to the tune of Rs.150/-was granted to her against which a revision was filed by Mohd. Ishaq before the Sessions Judge, Moradabad. It so happened, in revision a compromise took place that the husband of the deceased promised that he will keep his wife with peace and dignity in future. The Sessions Judge allowed to take his wife back to his home on 20.5.1985. It so happened that on 15.02.1986, the informant received a letter whereby fact of cruelty both mentally and physically being perpetrated upon the deceased was disclosed then the informant's son along with other relatives arrived at the house of the in-laws of his daughter on 17.02.1986 where they were badly treated and returned. Later on, the informant also visited the house of the in-laws of his daughter and he too was maltreated and returned. Thereafter, report was made to various higher authorities of the police, details whereof are made in the first information report itself. As the first information report proceeds further, it indicates that one Abdul Salam @ Sukha master, a neighbour of the informant came to him and told around at 8:00 a.m. on 25.03.1987 that the informant's daughter expired on 15.03.1987 and this death has been caused on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand and consequent perpetration of cruelty and in order to cause disappearance of evidence, she was buried. Request was made for lodging the report and taking appropriate action. The written report is Ext. Ka-1.
5. Record further reveals that contents of the written information were taken down in the concerned Check FIR at Case Crime No.82 of 1987 under Sections 302, 201, 498A I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Behjoi, District Moradabad, on 26.03.1987 at 09:35 p.m. Check FIR is Ext. Ka-11.
6. On the basis of entries so made in the check F.I.R., a case was registered against the appellants in the relevant G.D. at the aforesaid Case Crime Number at Police Station Behjoi, under aforesaid Sections of I.P.C. and Dowry Prohibition Act against the appellant. General diary copy is on record.
7. After registration of the case, the investigation ensued and the same was entrusted to Circle Officer concerned who pursuant to the lodging of the first information report proceeded to the spot and facilitated for preparati
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
