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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 3456

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ABC – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent
CRA (DB) 183 OF 2024



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

CRA (DB) 183 OF 2024

Vs.

The State of West Bengal

With CRA 538 of 2017

& Anr.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal

Before: The Hon’ble Justice Arijit Banerjee

&

The Hon’ble Justice Apurba Sinha Ray

For the Appellants : Mr. Avishek Sinha, Adv.

M s. Madhusree Banerjee, Adv.

For the State : Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld. P.P.,

Ms. Sreyashee Biswas, Adv.

M s. Nandini Chatterjee, Adv.

Reserved on : 06.04.2026

Judgment on : 02.07.2026

Apurba Sinha Ray, J.

1. By this common judgment CRA (DB) 183 of 2024 and CRA 538 of

2017 are hereby disposed of for the sake of convenience and brevity.

Both the appeals challenged the judgment and order dated

13.06.2017 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions

Judge, 2 Court, Uluberia in Sessions Trial No. 64U of 2015 whereby

nd

the appellants were convicted under Section 498A/ 304B/34 of IPC

##PAGE2##

and whereas the appellant was sentenced to suffer

rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 304B/34 IPC along with

other sentences, the appellants namely and

, parents-in-law of the victim, were sentenced to suffer

rigorous imprisonment for 7 years alongwith fine.

2. The facts of the case are that married the deceased

on 24.04.2010. At the time of marriage, gold ornaments,

cash and household articles were allegedly given from the side of the

bride. After marriage, the couple started residing together in the

matrimonial home and a girl child was born out of the wedlock.

According to the prosecution, after some time the appellant and

his family members started demanding further money and subjected

the deceased to physical and mental torture. The prosecution case

further states that the deceased used to request her brother to sell

their ancestral property and give her share of the proceeds. It appears

from the evidence that on earlier occasions portions of the ancestral

property were sold and the sale proceeds were shared between the

deceased and her brother. On 23.06.2014, the brother of the deceased

allegedly received information over the telephone regarding the

incident. He went to the matrimonial house and found the deceased

and her minor daughter hanging from the ceiling in dead condition.

Thereafter, on 25.06.2014, Uluberia Police Station Case No. 479 of

2014 was registered under Sections 498A/302/304B/34 of the Indian

Penal Code against the appellant and his parents on the complaint of

the elder brother of the deceased. was arrested on

Page 2 of 13

##PAGE3##

26.06.2014 and his parents were arrested on 28.06.2014. Upon

completion of investigation, a charge sheet was submitted under

Sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and

4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. During the trial, the prosecution

examined fifteen witnesses. The defence case was one of complete

denial and false implication. The defence specifically relied upon a

suicide note allegedly written by the deceased, wherein the appellant

and his family members were exonerated from responsibility. The

handwriting expert also opined that the handwriting in the suicide

note matched with the admitted handwriting of the deceased. The

Learned Trial Court acquitted the accused persons from the charge

under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code but convicted the

appellant and his parents under Sections 498A/34 and 304B/34 of

the Indian Penal Code. The appellant, was sentenced to suffer

rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 304B/34 IPC and other

appellants for rigorous imprisonment for 7 years along with other

sentences. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of

conviction and sentence, the above appeals were preferred before this

Court on different dates.

3. The husband filed CRA (DB) 183 of 2024 challenging the

judgment and order of sentence, and his parents preferred CRA 538 of

2017 challenging the relevant order of conviction and sentence as

aforesaid.

4. Mr. Sinha, learned Counsel for the appellant, has

submitted that the Learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the

Page 3 of 13

##PAGE4##

evidence on record

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