SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(All) 439

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
Tajeem – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2490 of 2022
Decided On : 20-02-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sushil Pandey.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section-304-B, 498A, 304B, 302, 201, 504, 506 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 374, 304, 313 – Dowry Prohibition Act – Section 4 –Evidence Act – Section 106 – Documentary Evidence – Demand of Dowry – Criminal appeal has been filed against judgment and order by Additional District Sessions Judge Sessions Trial arising out of Case – Prosecution complainant – Held, Learned trial Judge law that when discretion has been granted to learned trial Judge not arbitrarily capriciously or perversely but has been properly exercised by accepted judicial norms – Court appellant is in jail interest of justice maximum sentence U remissions sentence awarded Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act shall remain unaltered sentences shall run concurrently clear that fine clause shall remain unaltered – Appeal is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Suresh Kumar Gupta, J.)

1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dated 14.9.2022 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Sitapur in Sessions Trial No. 809 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No. 51 of 2013 relating to Police Station-Khairabad, District-Sitapur, whereby convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offences under section-304-B I.P.C. for fourteen years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/-and in default of payment of fine, three months additional simple imprisonment; under Section-498-A I.P.C. for three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2,000/-and in default of payment of fine, two months additional simple imprisonment; under Section-201 IPC for two years imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2,000/-and in default of payment of fine, two months additional simple imprisonment; and under Section-4 of Dowry Prohibition Act for one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000/-and in default of payment of fine, one month additional simple imprisonment.

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant Qamar Jahan, W/o Imamuddin is a resident of Biswan, Sitapur. The complainant had married her daughter Tarannum with Tajeem (appellant) about 18 months ago. In the marriage, the applicant had given dowry according to her status, but the accused-appellant and her mother Asiya, Aafaq and Aafaq and his wife and Sajia Bano were not happy with the dowry given and the additional dowry demand of motorcycle was being raised. On nonfulfillment of the demand, they used to harass the daughter of the complainant right from the time of her marriage and on 01.04.2013, they killed the complainant's daughter by thrashing her and hanging her with a rope around her neck and buried the dead body secretly. On getting information from others, when the complainant went to matrimonial house of her daughter and inquired about her daughter (deceased), the family members of the appellant chased the complainant away from their house by abusing her and extended threat that if you take any legal action, I will kill you too. On the basis of written report, the First Information Report was registered against the appellant and other family members in Case Crime No. 51 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 304B, 302, 201, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on 02.04.2013 at police station-Khairabad, District- Sitapur.

3. During course of investigation, on 3.4.2013 on receiving oral information from the City Magistrate, the Nayab Tehsildar Rohit Kumar Maurya reached the place of occurrence near the cemetery secretariat. The Sub-Inspector Vidyashankar Shukla of Thana Khairabad was already present there. As per the instructions of Additional District Magistrate, Sitapur and City Magistrate, the proceedings of Panchayatnama were conducted by them. An arbitrator was appointed from among the people present there and after taking the opinion of the arbitrators, S.I. Vidyashankar prepared the panchayatnama under his direction. Thereafter, the dead body was sealed and relevant police papers for postmortem were handed over to Constable Vijay Kumar Verma and Pindarlal. After preparing the relevant papers relating to postmortem, the dead body was sent for post mortem and the same was conducted by the PW-4, Dr. Rakesh Kumar, Senior Consultant on 3.4.2013 at district hospital, Sitapur and prepared post mortem report. The doctor opined that the cause of death was due to hanging. The time of death of the deceased may be about three days ago i.e. on 1.4.2013.

4. After completion of the investigation, the investigating officer submitted the charge-sheet against the appellant and other family members including the accused Sajia U/s 498A, 304B, 302, 201, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on 23.6.2013 and 25.7.2013 before the magistrate court who took cognizance and the case was committed to the court of sessions on 26.11.2013 where the case was r

              Click Here to Read the rest of this document
              1
              2
              3
              4
              5
              6
              7
              8
              9
              10
              11
              SupremeToday Portrait Ad
              supreme today icon
              logo-black

              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

              qr

              Scan Me!

              India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

              For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

              whatsapp-icon Back to top