Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAMESH SINHA, RAJ BEER SINGH, JJ.
Dharam Das – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 6896 of 2011
Decided On : 29-09-2020
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 313 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 498-A/34, 323/34, 326/34, 304-B/34 – Dowry Prohibition Act – Section ¾ - Harrassment – Order of Conviction – Criminal Appeal has been preferred against judgment and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Kaushambi in Session Trial, Crime under Sections 498-A/34, 323/34, 326/34, 304-B/34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as IPC) and section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act whereby accused-appellant Dharam Das has been convicted under section 498-A, 304-B of IPC and ¾ of DP Act – He was sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 304-B IPC, imprisonment for five years along with fine of Rs. 15,000/- under Section 3 of DP Act and two years rigorous imprisonment along with the fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 4 of DP Act –
Finding of the Court:
There is evidence that it was the accused-appellant, who put her on fire and deceased suffered severe burn injuries. Though the trial court did not frame charge under section 302 IPC but the specific role of accused-appellant cannot be ignored. In case of Kailash Kaur vs. State of Punjab, (1987) 2 SCC 631, the prosecution case was that the sister-in-law caught hold of the deceased and the mother-in-law poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire. – The Supreme Court observed that “whenever such cases come before the court and offence is brought home to the accused beyond reasonable doubt, it is the duty of the court to deal with it in most severe and strict manner and award the maximum penalty prescribed by the law in order that it may operate as a deterrent to other persons from committing such anti-social crimes. – In the present case deceased Saroj Devi suffered incident of burning only 7 months after her marriage. – After suffering severe burn injuries, deceased struggled for life for about two months in hospital. – It is also established that she was continuously being harassed for dowry since after her marriage and she continued to face this trauma till the incident. – It may also be noticed that accused-appellant was also convicted under section 498-A IPC but in its wisdom the learned trial court did not choose to award any sentence on that count. – It appears a case of rare category so as to warrant the maximum sentence i.e. life imprisonment and thus, court find no good reasons to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellant. – In view of aforesaid conviction of accused-appellant Dharam Das for offences under section 498-A, 304-B IPC and section 4 D.P. Act is upheld. – The sentences awarded under section 304-B IPC and section 4 D.P. Act are also upheld. However, conviction and sentence of accused-appellant under Section 3 D.P. Act is set aside. – Accused-appellant is stated in custody and he shall serve out the remaining sentence. –
Result: Appeal Partly Allowed
JUDGMENT :
RAJ BEER SINGH, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 17.11.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Kaushambi in Session Trial No. 61 of 2009, Crime No. 277 of 2008, under Sections 498-A/34, 323/34, 326/34, 304-B/34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as IPC) and section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act (hereinafter referred as D.P. Act), whereby accused-appellant Dharam Das has been convicted under section 498-A, 304-B of IPC and ¾ of DP Act. He was sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 304-B IPC, imprisonment for five years along with fine of Rs. 15,000/- under Section 3 of DP Act and two years rigorous imprisonment along with the fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 4 of DP Act. No sentence was awarded under section 498-A IPC. All the above sentences were to run concurrently. However, co-accused Dharam Veer, Kailasha Devi and Phaguhar were acquitted of all the charges.
2. Accused-appellant Dharam Das is husband of deceased Saroj Devi and their marriage was solemnized on 20.02.2008. After marriage, accused-appellant Dharam Das and his family members used to beat and harass Saroj Devi for dowry. They used to demand a buffalo and cash of Rs. 40,000/-. Whenever deceased used to meet her family members, she used to tell them about the dowry demand and harassment. First informant Veer Singh, who is father of deceased Saroj Devi, tried to make accused-appellant understand but in vain. It is alleged that on 25.09.2008 accused-appellant Dharam Das and his other family members put the deceased Saroj Devi ablaze by pouring kerosene over her and resultantly, she has suffered serious burn injuries. After information, PW-1 Veer Singh and his family members reached there and the deceased was taken to Chayal Primary Health Center and from there she was referred to Swaroop Rani Nehru Hospital, Allahabad and accordingly she was admitted there.
3. PW-1 Veer Singh reported the matter to police by submitting a tehrir Exhibit Ka-1 and consequently first information report was registered on 26.09.2008 at 23:30 hours under Section 498-A, 326, 323 of IPC and ¾ of DP Act vide Exhibit Ka-8.
4. It is also the case of prosecution that on 26.09.2008, while deceased was lying admitted in said SRN hospital, her statement was recorded by Sri. Sudhir Kumar Mishra, Additional City Magistrate, Allahabad vide Exhibit Ka-15 and in that dying declaration deceased has told that her husband Dharam Das used to beat her and that a day before, he beat her severely and set her ablaze after pouring kerosene. She has also stated that before that incident, he has turned his mother and brother out of the home.
5. During treatment, on 26.11.2008 deceased Saroj Devi succumbed to injuries. Inquest proceedings were conducted by PW-3 Surendra Bahadur Singh, Nayab Tehsildar vide inquest report Exhibit Ka-2. Dead body of deceased was sealed and sent for post-mortem. After death of deceased, section 304-B IPC was added during investigation.
6. Post-mortem on dead body of deceased was conducted on 26.11.2008 by PW-5 Dr. T.B. Maurya vide post-mortem report Exhibit Ka-10. She has sustained following ante-mortem injuries:
(ii) Post burn granulating tissue present on posterior of whole chest including belly axilla and upper part of abdomen.
(iii) Healed burn injury present on front of both upper limbs.
(iv) Bed sore 4 x 3 cm present on back of pus coming out from sore.
Cause of death was stated due to septimic shock as a result of ante mortem injury.
7. Investigation was conducted by PW-6 S.I. Ram Pal Chaudhary. During course of investigation, he prepared site plan Exhibit Ka-11, recorded statements of witnesses and after completion of investigation, accused persons were charge-sheeted.
8. Accused-appellant Dharam Das and co-accused Dharam Veer, Kailashi Devi and Phaguhar were charged for the offences under Section 498-A, 323/34, 326/34, 304-B,/34 of IPC an
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
