Virendra Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(All) 1642

SIDDHARTH, SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI
Virendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : A.K.S. Solanki, Achyuta Nand Pandey, Bablu Singh, Dileep Kumar(Senior Adv.), Jitendra Kumar Shishodia, Rajrshi Gupta, Samit Gopal(Elevated), Sudhir Mehrotra, Vinod Singh, Aradhana Chauhan, Gaurav Pratap Singh., G.A.
For the Respondents: A.K. Singh, Aradhana Chauhan, G.P. Singh, G.S. Hajela, A.K.S. Solanki, J.S. Sengar, Jitendra Kumar Shishodia, Jagdish Singh Sengar, Rizwan Ahamad, D.R. Chaudhary, Dileep Kumar(Senior Adv.), Pushpendra Singh, Rajrshi Gupta.

JUDGMENT :

Siddharth, J.

1. Heard Shri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants; Ms. Divya Ojha, learned A.G.A.-I for the State; Shri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned Special Counsel for the High Court and perused the material on record.

2. This criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 14.09.2010 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Aligarh in S.T. No. 931 of 2006 (State vs. Virendra Singh and 4 others) connected with S.T. No. 949 of 2007 (State vs. Vishambhar) whereby the appellants were acquitted for offence under Sections-498-A, 304-B, 201 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. However, the appellants have been convicted for offence under Section 506(I) IPC and awarded two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo two months additional simple imprisonment.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the informant, Panna Singh, married his daughter, Kumari Bhumika, with the appellant no. 3, Manoj on 22.06.2024. Rs. 5 lakhs in cash and other goods were given in dowry to the accused-appellants but the accused persons used to demand one Maruti car more in dowry and used to torture his daughter. Whenever his daughter used to come