Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 572 (UTT)

RAVINDRA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2017-10-30

LOK PAL SINGH

body2017
JUDGMENT Hon'ble Lok Pal Singh, J. (Oral) Present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 25.07.2013 passed by Session Judge Udham Singh Nagar in session trail No. 56 of 2011, State vs Ravindra & Others convicting the appellant under Section 498A of IPC has been sentenced for a period of two years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and under Section 304-B of IPC sentenced for a period of ten years rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record. 3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 26.10.2010at about 6:10 AM, PW-1 Gopal Singh lodged a report at P.S. Kotwali Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, stating therein that marriage of his daughter Jamna Devi (deceased) was solemnized with the accused/appellant Ravindra ten months ago of the incident as per Hindu rituals. In the marriage, he gave a dowry like motorcycle, gold, silver and some other goods. However, the accused/appellant and his family members were not satisfied with the dowry and they started to commit cruelty with the deceased and some time accused demanded money from the deceased. At the time death of the deceased, she was pregnant of about 8 months. He further submitted that the accused appellant, father-in-law and mother-in-law, they committed murdered of the deceased on 25.10.2010. On the complaint case crime No. 335 of 2010 under Sections 498A, 304B, 302 and 316 of IPC, Police Station, Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar was lodged against the appellant and his parents. 4. After conducting the investigation submitted the charge-sheet. Post mortem of the deceased conducted on 26.10.2010. The cause of death of the deceased asphyxia due to the hanging, the charge-sheet submitted against the appellant under Sections 498A and 304B of IPC. 5. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, got examined PW-1 Gopal Singh father of the deceased, PW-2 Dr. S.S. Nabiyal, who had conducted the post mortem of the deceased, PW-3 Kishan Singh, who is brother of the deceased to prove the demand of alleged dowry, PW-4 K.K. Singh, SDM Dunda witness of inquest report, PW-5 Puran Singh, who is also brother of the deceased, PW-6 Gopal Ram, Constable he lodged FIR and PW-7 Mamta Bora, Circle Officer, who conducted investigation of the case. 6. 6. The appellant was arrested on 26.10.2010 and since than he is languishing in jail and he was not released on bail during the trial. Though, from the perusal of the record, it would reveal that deceased (Jamna Devi), she committed suicide by hanging tagged with her saree. From the perusal of the record available it is the case of hanging as deceased committed suicide and which is supported by the post mortem report. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the minimum sentence under Section 304B of IPC is seven years. He further submitted that since the appellant is languishing in jail more than seven years, therefore, he has submitted that without going into the merit of the case, whether this is a case of an acquittal or not. Since the appellant has completed more than seven years rigorous imprisonment, therefore, he may be released for undergone of seven years. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that, the learned trial court has not recorded any reason for punishing the appellant for a period of ten years, more than the minimum sentence prescribed. 9. Considering, the facts and circumstances of the case more particularly when the learned counsel for the appellant is not willing to argue the appeal on merit as well the appellant has served more than seven years of rigorous imprisonment and he has no criminal history. Sentence awarded to the appellant of ten years is reduced to the period of undergone seven years. 10. The order was fine awarded against the appellant is also set aside. Thus, he need not to deposit the amount of fine. Since the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC, the appellant has been convicted for rigorous imprisonment of two years and for offence punishable under Section 304B of IPC for a period of ten years, the lesser period of two years rigorous imprisonment merges in the ten years. Appeal is partly allowed. The appellant shall be released forthwith, if his custody is not required any other case. 11. LCR of the case be returned to the trial court for compliance of the judgment passed by this Court. 12. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs.