Point of Law: The Court will be failing in its duty if appropriate punishment is not awarded for a crime which has been committed not only against the individual victim but also against the society to which the criminal and victim belong. The punishment to be awarded for a crime must not be irrelevant but it should conform to and be consistent with the atrocity and brutality with which the crime has been perpetrated, the enormity of the crime warranting public abhorrence and it should respond to the society's cry for justice against the criminal

JUDGMENT :

VIRENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 374 (2) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Code) by the appellants-Smt. Chameli, Durg Vijay and Dinesh Kumar (hereinafter referred to as appellants) against the judgment and order dated 19.09.2003, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Hardoi in Sessions Trial No. 1099/98, arising out of Case Crime No. 74/98, Police Station-Tadiyawan, District-Hardoi, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced for seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2,000/- for offence under Section 306 I.P.C. and for one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. It has further been directed that the appellants will have to undergo six months simple imprisonment in default of payment of fine for offence under Section 306 I.P.C. and three months simple imprisonment in default of payment of fine for the offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. All the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the deceased-Guddi Devi (hereinafter referred to as deceased) was married with the appellant-Dinesh Kumar in the year 1994. The appellants-Durg Vijay and Smt. Chameli are the parents of the appellant-Dinesh Kumar. On 25.04.1998, the deceased-Guddi Devi died due to hanging. The appellant-Durg Vijay, who was Chaukidar of his village-Mugalipur, informed the said incident to concerned police of Police Station-Tadiyawan, District-Hardoi. Sri. Krishna Bajpayee-Nayab Tehsildar (Executive Magistrate), on the direction of concerned Sub Divisional Magistrate, rushed to the place of occurrence on 26.04.1998, inspected the dead body of the deceased, conducted inquest proceeding, prepared inquest report (Ext.Ka-6) and other document required for post-mortem examination, sealed the dead body and sent it for post-mortem examination to District Hospital, Hardoi.

3. Nanke (PW-1), brother of the deceased, made a written complaint dated 27.04.1998 to District Magistrate, Hardoi, endorsing its copy (Ext.Ka-1) to Superintendent of Police and another copy (Ext.Ka-3) to Chief Minister, U.P. alleging therein that his sister was married four years ago with the appellant-Dinesh Kumar and in her marriage, sufficient dowry was given but the appellants were demanding a she-buffalo and transistor in dowry which could not be given by them due to poverty. It was further alleged in the said report that due to non-fulfillment of said dowry, the appellants used to torture his sister, who (deceased) used to complain him. It is further alleged that on 29.04.1998, there was Mundon Ceremony of his son-Pinku and in order to get back (Bidai) of his sister, he (PW-1) had gone to his sister’s matrimonial house (Sasural) on 26.04.1998 and when he reached there, he found the dead body of his sister, kept in room. It was further alleged that he narrated the whole story to the police Inspector, present on the spot, who assured him that necessary steps were being taken and also took his signature on a paper. It was further alleged in the said information that after post-mortem of his sister, he again tried to lodge an F.I.R. but failed to lodge it as the appellant-Durg Vijay, who was a Chaukidar, was having better relationship with the concerned local police. It was further alleged that his sister was hanged by the appellants, so necessary action be taken against them.

4. A criminal case, bearing Case Crime No. 74/98, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, was registered against the appellants and chik report (Ext.Ka-12) and G.D. report (Ext.Ka-13) was prepared by Constable-Mohd. Rashid Khan (PW-7). Investigation of the case was handed over to Dy. S.P. A.K. Vaidya (PW-9), who reached at the place of occurrence and after its inspection, prepared site plan (Ext.Ka-14), arrested the appellants and recorded their statement as well as of other witnesses. After the transfer of P