Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Lakshman Prasad, son of late Bhukhra Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. Since both the appeal arises out of the common judgment of conviction dated 28.01.1998 and order of sentence dated 02.02.1998, as such, they have been tagged together and taken up together for analogous hearing and are being disposed of by this common order.
Prayer:
2. Both the criminal appeals have been preferred under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of conviction dated 28.01.1998 and order of sentence dated 02.02.1998, passed by the learned 4th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 289 of 1996, whereby and whereunder, the learned court below has convicted the appellants under section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced the appellant of Criminal Appeal (DB) No.22 of 1998(R) namely Dinesh Prasad to undergo RI for life and the appellants of Criminal Appeal (DB) No.23 of 1998(R) namely Lakshman Prasad and Smt. Janki Devi were sentenced to undergo RI for seven years each.
Prosecution Case:
3. The prosecution case, in brief, as per the written report dated 28.09.1995, of the informant Jeewachh Sahu (P.W.-1) is that daughter of the informant, Renu Sahu was married with the appellant
To sustain a conviction under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must establish a proximate link between dowry-related cruelty and the victim's death within seven years of marriage, demonstrating that....
The court upheld conviction for dowry death, emphasizing that evidence of torture and demand for dowry proven leads to presumption of causation under relevant legal provisions.
The prosecution must establish all ingredients of Section 304B IPC, including demand for dowry soon before death, to invoke presumption of guilt under Section 113B of the Evidence Act.
The central legal point established is the application of Section 304B of IPC and Section 113-B of the Evidence Act in cases of dowry death, emphasizing the need for proximity between cruelty/harassm....
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 304-B IPC, establishing that the deceased was subjected to cruelty for dowry demands, leading to her suicide, thus satisfying the legal requirements fo....
The court ruled that to establish dowry death under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must show cruelty for dowry was inflicted soon before the victim's death, with a clear link between the two.
The prosecution must prove that the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands soon before her death to establish a case under Section 304B of the IPC; failure to ....
The prosecution must prove cruelty or harassment for dowry demand soon before death to sustain a conviction under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC; insufficient evidence leads to acquittal.
(1) Dowry death – Courts should use their discretion to determine if period between cruelty or harassment and death of victim would come within term “soon before”. What is pivotal to such determinati....
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
