Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH, LUCKNOW)
AJAI KUMAR SRIVASTAVA-I, J.
Putan – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.138 of 2019
Decided on : 07-07-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 498A, 304B, 498, 323, 504, 506, 302 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 161 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 113-B – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1962 – Section 3, 4 – Demand of dowry – Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty – Dowry death – Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt – Punishment for criminal intimidation – Offence of murder – Examination of witnesses by police – Held, However, keeping in view fact that there is nothing on record to suggest that accused-appellant had any previous criminal history and also that he is aged and having regard to fact that accused-appellant is in jail since conviction and is serving out sentence awarded to him, sentence awarded to accused-appellant under Section 304-B I.P.C. is liable to be modified from ten years’ rigorous imprisonment to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment only – Accordingly, sentence awarded to accused-appellant under Section 304-B I.P.C. is modified from ten years’ rigorous imprisonment to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment only – Conviction under Section 498A I.P.C. and awarding of sentence for three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine rigorous imprisonment under Section 304B I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment with a fine Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act are also affirmed – Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the accused-appellant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh and Sri Alok Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 04.09.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Unnao in Sessions Trial No.54/2015, arising out of Crime No.1902 of 2014, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. & Section 4 of D. P. Act, Police Station Gangaghat, District Unnao whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced for a period of three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.8,000/-for the offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, he has further been directed to undergo three months' additional imprisonment. He has also been convicted and sentenced for a period of ten years' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 304B I.P.C. He has also been convicted and sentenced for a period of two years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.6000/-for the offence under Section 4 of D. P. Act and in default of payment of fine, he has further been directed to undergo two months' additional simple imprisonment. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
3. Brief facts of this case are that the first informant, Pyare Lal submitted a written report, Ex. Ka1 to Kotwali, Unnao stating therein that his sister, Phoolmati was married to the appellant, Putan two months' ago according to Hindu Rites and they resided in Mohalla Srinagar, Police Station-Gangaghat. His sister was being treated with cruelty quite offenly by the accused-appellant and his family members for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. This fact was communicated to the first informant by his sister telephonically. The appellant also used to extent threat to the deceased due to non-fulfillment of a tractor. On 01.10.2014, the landlord of his sister, Smt. Sushila informed the first informant on telephone that his sister has been burnt.
4. On the basis of aforesaid written report, Ex. Ka-1, Crime No.1902 of 2014, under Sections 498A and 304-B I.P.C. read with ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act came to be lodged against the accused-appellant on 01.10.2014 at 12:15 P.M. at Police Station Gangaghat.
5. Investigating Officer, P.W.-7, S. I. Manoj Kumar Awasthi recorded the statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He visited the place of occurrence and prepared a site plan, Ex. Ka-12. Due to transfer of said Investigating Officer, P.W.-6, C. O., Sri Gopi Nath Soni under took the investigation. He also recorded the statements of some of the prosecution witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and upon conclusion of investigation, he submitted the charge sheet, Ex. Ka-6 against the accused-appellant.
6. In order to bring home guilt of the accused-appellant, the prosecution has examined P.W.-1, Pyare Lal, P.W.-2, Bachhu, P.W.-3, Nayab Tehsildar, Renuka Awasthi, P.W.-4, Dr. Sanjay Kumar, P.W.-5, Rampal Singh, P.W.-6, Investigating Officer, Sri Gopi Nath Soni and P.W.-7, Investigating Officer, Manoj Kumar Awasthi.
7. The accused-appellant, in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., has stated himself to be innocent and has also stated to have been falsely implicated in this case. The accused-appellant was charged under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. & 4 D. P. Act and also charged, in alternate, under Section 302 I.P.C. to which he denied and claimed to be tried.
8. In defence, a copy of judgment of A.C.J.M., Court No.5 rendered in Criminal Case No.1017 of 2013 "Phoolmati vs. Pradeep Kumar & Ors.", under Sections 498, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. read with Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.-Kotwali Sadar, Unnao was filed.
9. The post-mortem on the cadaver of the deceased was conducted by a panel of doctors consisting of Dr. Sanjay Kumar, P.W.-4 and Dr. R. K. Raman on 02.10.2014.
10. According to post-mortem report, Ex. Ka-3, the entire body of the deceased was having superficial to skin deep burn injuries and hyoid bone was found to be fra
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
