MOHAMMAD HOSHAN Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(SC)-2002-9-84
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on
September 16,2002
MOHD.HOSHAN
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
SAHEBRAO VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2000-5-7] [REFERRED TO]JAWAHAR MAGHJI SINDHI BANSALI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2005-9-35] [REFERRED TO]
JAYRAM RABIDAS VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2007-8-3] [REFERRED TO]
BESAI VENKATA RAMANA MURTHY VS. STATE [LAWS(APH)-2002-12-96] [REFERRED TO]
K RAMAKRISHNAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2006-7-69] [REFERRED TO]
SUDHAKAR SHRIDHAR VISPUTE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-10-112] [REFERRED TO]
DNYANESHWAR JAGANNATH BARI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-11-39] [REFERRED TO]
GURPREET SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2009-11-44] [REFERRED TO]
GURNAM SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2007-10-22] [REFERRED TO]
RADHA KRISHAN VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2005-11-48] [REFERRED TO]
BALWANT SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2005-3-57] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. ISHWAR SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2013-1-285] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MANSUKHLAL GORDHANDAS VAJANI [LAWS(GJH)-2014-3-128] [REFERRED TO]
BABUL AHMED, S/O MD AFTABUDDIN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2012-5-95] [REFERRED TO]
SAHEBRAO VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2006-5-35] [REFERRED TO]
HIMABANTA BANDOPADHYAY VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2011-1-16] [REFERRED TO]
NAGESHKUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2010-1-609] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESHWAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2010-1-437] [REFERRED TO]
JAGSIR SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2003-10-36] [REFERRED TO]
HADI-UJ-ZAMAN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2013-3-8] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RAMESHBHAI BHAGWANBHAI PARMAR [LAWS(GJH)-2014-5-18] [REFERRED TO]
SONIA VS. STATE OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2016-2-376] [REFERRED TO]
R K SHARMA VS. SHIRISH HARDENIA [LAWS(MPH)-2008-5-69] [RELIED ON]
ABDUL REHMAN AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2012-1-544] [REFERRED]
SATISH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2013-9-836] [REFERRED]
GHANSHYAM, S/O BHAGOLIRAM VERMA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THR POLICE STATION RAJIM [LAWS(CHH)-2018-10-133] [REFERRED TO]
DIPTI RATHORE VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2019-11-27] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-11-392] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL PATEL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2020-2-40] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL PATEL VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2019-2-244] [REFERRED TO]
KULWANT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2020-9-141] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
Shivaraj V. Patil, J. -
(1.)It is yet another unfortunate case of a young girl of 18 years whose all hopes and aspirations to live a happy married life were burnt and destroyed by the burn injuries caused by herself to end her life when the appellants subjected her to cruelty and abated the commission of suicide by her within 11 months after marriage.
(2.)The appellants were tried for offences under Sections 304-B, 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge, after trial acquitted them of all the charges giving benefit of doubt. On appeal, the High Court while confirming the order of acquittal under Section 304-B of the IPC, set aside the order of the acquittal recorded under Sections 306 and 498-A and convicted and sentenced them for two years' rigorous imprisonment each for the said offences making the sentences to run concurrently. Thus, aggrieved by this judgment and order of the High Court, the appellants have filed this appeal before this Court. The State has not filed any appeal against the order of the High Court confirming the order acquitting the appellants for the offence under Section 304-B IPC.
(3.)The prosecution case as projected during the trial is that the appellant No.1 is the son of the appellant No. 2. The deceased Razwana Parveen was married to the appellant No.1 on 26-4-1987. Mohammed Allauddin Asir Mansoori (PW-3), Allauddin Mansoori (PW-4), and Rahman Bee (PW-5) are the brother, father and the mother of the deceased respectively. On 9-3-1988 at about 9.30 P.M., the deceased sustained burn injuries in the house of the appellants where she was living. She was shifted to Osmania General Hospital at Hyderabad. She died at 11.00 A.M. on 12-3-1988 due to burn injuries. It was alleged by the prosecution that the deceased committed suicide because of cruel treatment of the appellants after her marriage and that the appellants were demanding dowry from her.
(2.)The appellants were tried for offences under Sections 304-B, 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge, after trial acquitted them of all the charges giving benefit of doubt. On appeal, the High Court while confirming the order of acquittal under Section 304-B of the IPC, set aside the order of the acquittal recorded under Sections 306 and 498-A and convicted and sentenced them for two years' rigorous imprisonment each for the said offences making the sentences to run concurrently. Thus, aggrieved by this judgment and order of the High Court, the appellants have filed this appeal before this Court. The State has not filed any appeal against the order of the High Court confirming the order acquitting the appellants for the offence under Section 304-B IPC.
(3.)The prosecution case as projected during the trial is that the appellant No.1 is the son of the appellant No. 2. The deceased Razwana Parveen was married to the appellant No.1 on 26-4-1987. Mohammed Allauddin Asir Mansoori (PW-3), Allauddin Mansoori (PW-4), and Rahman Bee (PW-5) are the brother, father and the mother of the deceased respectively. On 9-3-1988 at about 9.30 P.M., the deceased sustained burn injuries in the house of the appellants where she was living. She was shifted to Osmania General Hospital at Hyderabad. She died at 11.00 A.M. on 12-3-1988 due to burn injuries. It was alleged by the prosecution that the deceased committed suicide because of cruel treatment of the appellants after her marriage and that the appellants were demanding dowry from her.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.