IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAMESH SINHA, SAMIT GOPAL, JJ.
Ravi – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2161 of 2007
Decided On : 11-01-2021
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304- B - Imprisonment - Penalty - sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. The Trial Court has further directed that the period, for which the accused has already been in jail, shall be set off against the sentence recorded against him –
Finding of the Court:
It is not to be lost sight off that the present case is a case of dowry death - Motive for the offence is that of non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry - Death is unnatural and within seven years of marriage, to be more precise after 3-1/2 years of marriage - Court, accordingly while confirming the conviction of the appellant under Section 304-B IPC sentence the appellant to 12 years' (twelve years') rigorous imprisonment and the sentence imposed by the trial court under Section 304B I.P.C. is hereby set aside - Other convictions and sentences passed by the trial court are, however, confirmed –
Result:Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
SAMIT GOPAL, J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 08.02.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 18, Agra in Sessions Trial No. 666 of 2006 (State of U.P. vs. Ravi), whereby the accused-appellant Ravi has been convicted and sentenced under Section 304- B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short referred to as ‘IPC’) to life imprisonment, under Section 498-A IPC to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default of payment of fine to one year rigorous imprisonment, under Section 4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 to one year rigorous imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to one month rigorous imprisonment. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. The Trial Court has further directed that the period, for which the accused has already been in jail shall be set off against the sentence recorded against him.
2. The prosecution case as per the first information report lodged by Maya Ram PW-1 is that his daughter Mamta was married around 3½ years back with Ravi S/o Kailash Chandra R/o Behind Balkeshwar Mandir, Police Station New Agra, District-Agra and in the marriage he had given dowry as per his capability. He further states that after one year of marriage Ravi started beating his daughter and started creating pressure on her for bringing a motorcycle in dowry, failing which she would be murdered. The said fact was told by his daughter Mamta many times to him and inspite of repeated attempts to sort out the issue Ravi used to beat his daughter. Mamta got disturbed and was living in her maternal house since the last six months. He further states that he pacified Ravi, on which he told him that he will come on Raksha Bandhan on 09.08.2006 and had stated that if he wants his daughter to be taken then a motorcycle be given to him, otherwise he will kill his daughter. On 22.08.2006 in the absence of the first informant Ravi came to his house at about 10.00 a.m. wherein the daughter-in-law of the first informant namely Smt. Kranti and Smt. Vimlesh were at the house and in front of them beat his daughter Mamta and when the wife of the first informant went to give him his food then Ravi assaulted Mamta with knife on her stomach and ran away. It is further stated that on the shrieks, the daughter-in-law of the first informant reached there and they and his wife informed him. They went and saw Mamta lying on the floor in a pool of blood. She was taken to the hospital and on the way she died. It was then prayed that a report be registered and appropriate legal action be taken.
3. Maya Ram gave a typed application at the police station, which is dated 22.08.2006 for getting a first information report lodged, the same is marked as Exhibit Ka-1 to the records.
4. On the basis of the said application a first information report was lodged on 22.08.2006 at 16.45 hrs. at Police Station-Jagdishpura, District Agra as Case Crime No. 297 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act against Ravi S/o Kailash Chandra, the same is marked as Exhibit Ka-3 to the records.
5. An inquest was conducted on the dead-body on 22.08.2006, which started at 17.30 hrs. and concluded at 18.45 hrs., the same is marked as Exhibit Ka-2 to the records.
6. Post-mortem examination of the deceased Smt. Mamta was conducted on 23.08.2006 at 3.15 p.m. at Dr. B.D. Bhaskar PW-6. The doctor found the following anti-mortem injury on the body of the deceased:-
The doctor opined the cause of death due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of anti-mortem injury.
The time since death has been opined to be about one day.
7. The knife said to be used in the assault was recovered by the Investigating Officer on 22.08.2006 on the pointing out of Smt. Vimlesh W/o Kali Charan alias
Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death sh....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused can be convicted under Section 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act if the prosecution proves that the deceased w....
The judgment establishes the application of statutory provisions related to dowry death, matrimonial cruelty, and burden of proof under the Evidence Act.
Point of Law : For offence Under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code, punishment is imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.
The prosecution must prove demand for dowry and cruelty to establish a dowry death under Section 304B IPC, leading to a presumption of guilt against the accused.
The court affirmed conviction for dowry death, highlighting evidentiary requirements under IPC and the presumption of guilt upon failure to rebut accusations.
The prosecution must prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands soon before her death to establish a case under Sections 304B and 498A IPC.
Point of law : Dowry death - Conviction set aside - Articles, said to be demanded, are not such for which present appellants can be direct beneficiaries. Moreover, evidence on the above point is not ....
In dowry death cases, prosecution must prove unnatural death within seven years of marriage with cruelty/harassment soon before by husband/relatives linked to dowry demand to raise rebuttable presump....
The judgment reinforces the legal framework surrounding dowry death, emphasizing the importance of proving prior harassment related to dowry demands and the application of presumptions of guilt under....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.