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

2023 Supreme(All) 965

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, SYED AFTAB HUSAIN RIZVI, JJ.
Deepak @ Pilla And Another - Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 5169 of 2003 with Criminal Appeal No. 5259 of 2003
Decided On : 09-08-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Manish Tandon.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 498-A, 304-B – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – Section 3, 4 – Criminal Appeal – Charges framed – Judgment of conviction – Charges of offence – Dowry death – Held, Court have carefully examined two versions which have surfaced on record before us and in view of admission made by prosecution witnesses, Court are inclined to accept defence version that there was a discord in marital life of deceased on account of role played by her brother-in-law residing – It is also admitted that discord went to extent of lodging of a police complaint and it was only – Fact that there were no previous complaints and no marks of physical injury on deceased have also been worked out – Trial Court, therefore, fell in error in accepting prosecution case without subjecting testimony of witnesses of a careful analysis – In that view of matter, Court set aside finding of Court below, as per which, prosecution has succeeded in establishing guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt – Appeals allowed.

ORDER :

1. As per the office report, appellant No. 2, Ganga Sagar Tiwari in Criminal Appeal No. 5169 of 2003, who has been convicted in Session Trial No. 1453 of 2000, State Vs. Udai Narain and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 150 of 2000, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar and sentenced to life imprisonment, had died on 04.10.2009. Learned counsel for the appellant also supports such statement. In that view of the matter, Criminal Appeal No. 5169 of 2003 abates as against appellant No. 2-Ganga Sagar Tiwari.

2. As per the office report, appellant No. 1-Lakhan @ Satya Narain in Criminal Appeal No. 5259 of 2003, who has been convicted in Session Trial No. 1453 of 2000, State Vs. Udai Narain and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 150 of 2000, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar and sentenced to life imprisonment, had died on 03.12.2021. Learned counsel for the appellant also supports such statement. In that view of the matter, Criminal Appeal No. 5259 of 2003 abates as against appellant No. 1-Lakhan @ Satya Narain.

3. These two appeals have been filed challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the court below dated 17.09.2003 in Sessions Trial No. 1453 of 2000, State Vs. Udai Narain and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 150 of 2000, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar. By the impugned judgment the trial court has convicted and sentenced four accused, namely, Deepak alias Pilla (Devar), Ganga Sagar Tiwari (father-in-law), Lakhan alias Satya Narain (Devar) and Udai Narain @ Kallu (husband).

4. The appeals at the instance of Ganga Sagar Tiwari and Lakhan @ Satya Narain have been dismissed as having abated on account of their death. Thus, these two appeals, therefore, survive at the instance of Deepak alias Pilla (Devar) and Udai Narain @ Kallu (husband of the deceased).

5. By the impugned judgment, the accused-appellants, Deepak alias Pilla (Devar) and Udai Narain @ Kallu (husband) have been convicted and sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment under Section 304-B I.P.C., three years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-each under Section 498-A I.P.C. and on failure to deposit the fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment for three months each; two years simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-each under Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act and on failure to deposit the fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment for two months each; and two years simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-each under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and on failure to deposit the fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment for two months each.

6. Informant, who happens to be the father of the deceased, has given a written report on 10th of March, 2000 (Ex.Ka.1), stating that he had married his daughter with Udai Narain @ Kallu on 12.06.1995 as per Hindu traditions after giving adequate dowry as per his capabilities. After marriage the accused demanded dowry of Rs. 10,000/-and a gold chain on account of which the deceased was harassed and tortured. Such facts were disclosed by the deceased when she came to her house. The informant requested the accused not to harass his daughter since he has no means to arrange such dowry. A complaint was also given to the Incharge S.H.O., Civil Lines on 17.08.1998. On 07.03.2000 the in-laws of the deceased informed the first informant that his daughter is unwell and is hospitalized in K.P. Ganj Hospital. On receiving such information he came to the hospital along with his wife and found his daughter dead. Apprehension has been expressed that the deceased was done to death by the accused by administering some poison on account of dowry. Based on such written report

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top