Point of Law: It is settled legal position that appropriate sentence should be awarded after giving due consideration to the facts and circumstances of each case, nature of offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed. It is obligation of Court to constantly remind itself that right of victim, and be it said, on certain occasions persons aggrieved as well as society at large can be victims, never be marginalised. The measure of punishment should be proportionate to gravity of offence. Object of sentencing should be to protect society and to deter the criminal in achieving avowed object of law

JUDGMENT :

RAJ BEER SINGH, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against judgment and order 07.08.2006 and 08.08.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Court No. 3, Basti in Session Trial No. 267 of 2004 (State vs. Ram Ajor and Another), Police Station Dudhara, District Basti, whereby accused-appellant Ram Ajor has been convicted under sections 498A, 304-B of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as IPC) and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act (hereinafter referred as DP Act) and he was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 498-A IPC, life imprisonment under section 304-B IPC and one year rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 4 DP Act. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. Accused appellant Ram Ajor is husband of deceased Vimla Devi. As per first information report, prosecution version is that marriage of the accused-appellant Ram Ajor was solemnized with deceased Vimla Devi (daughter of informant Daya Ram) about six years prior to the incident and that informant Daya Ram has given dowry like clothes, utensils and watch etc. in the marriage. After marriage, accused-appellant Ram Ajor and his family members used to harass the deceased on account of dowry. They used to demand a golden chain and colour TV as additional dowry. Meanwhile, accused-appellant has also developed illicit relations with one widow lady namely Kismati Devi. Accused-appellant Ram Ajor used to beat the deceased at instance of said Kismati Devi. When deceased told these facts to her maternal family, her father has given a buffalo and some cash to the appellant but he was still not satisfied and continued to harass the deceased. On 21.06.2004 at around 10:00 AM while the deceased has gone for collecting grass (fodder), she was done to death by accused-appellant and alleged Kismati Devi.

3. Perusal of record shows after alleged incident on 21.06.2004, accused-appellant has given an information to the police vide application Exhibit Kha-1 on 21.06.2004 stating that when his wife has gone to collect grass in jungle, she has got herself hanged by neck’s noose of her ‘saari’ on a katahal tree. Thereafter, police have reached at the spot. Inquest proceedings were conducted by S.I. Motilal vide inquest report exhibit Ka-8 and dead body of the deceased was sealed and it was sent for post-mortem.

4. Post-mortem on the body of the deceased was conducted by PW-4 Dr. Mohd. Iqbal on 22.06.2004 vide post-mortem report Exhibit Ka-2. Deceased Vimla has sustained following injuries:-

(i) Contusion 8 cm x 8 cm over front of left shoulder.

(ii) Contusion 5.6 cm x 5.2 over mid part of left neck.

(iii) Contusion 6.2 cm x 4.8 cm over mid part of right neck.

(iv) Contusion 7.2 cm x 7 cm over left cheek.

The membranes and brain of deceased were congested. Similarly, laryn, trakiya and bronchi, Liver, spleen and kidney were also found congested.

Cause of death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation.

5. On 23.06.2004 informant Daya Ram has submitted a tehrir exhibit Ka-1 at the police station alleging facts as mentioned earlier and on that basis case was registered on 23.06.2004 by 16:30 hours under Section 498A, 304B IPC and ¾ DP Act against accused-appellant Ram Ajor and co-accused Kismati Devi vide FIR Exhibit Ka-6.

6. Investigation was conducted by PW-5 Ashok Kumar, Circle Officer, Mehdawal, Basti. During course of the investigation site plan exhibit Ka-3 was prepared and statements of witnesses were recorded. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused appellant Ram Ajor and co-accused Kismati Devi.

7. Trial court framed charges under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of DP Act against the accused-appellant and co-accused Kismati Devi. In order to bring home guilt of the accused persons, prosecution has examined six witnesses.

8. Accused persons were examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein accused-appellant Ram Ajor took the