UMAKANT Vs. STATE OF CHHATISGARH
LAWS(SC)-2014-7-29
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: CHHATTISGARH)
Decided on
July 01,2014
UMAKANT
Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Chhatisgarh
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
PANIBEN VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]S PANNEERSELVAM VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
ATBIR VS. GOVT OF N C T OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
CHANDER BHAN VS. STATE AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2016-1-247] [REFERRED TO]MUNNI DEVI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-6-18] [REFERRED TO]
GOPAL SAHA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2020-2-183] [REFERRED TO]
RANBIR SINGH TYAGI VS. STATE NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2016-8-49] [REFERRED TO]
MOORTHY VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2016-1-78] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. BIMLA DEVI [LAWS(HPH)-2017-3-149] [REFERRED TO]
RAVIPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2016-8-81] [REFERRED]
MADAN S/O HAZARI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR [LAWS(RAJ)-2017-7-156] [REFERRED TO]
MRS. MANASA ALIAS JWALA VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2021-7-18] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE FOR NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS. [LAWS(SC)-2017-5-43] [REFERRED TO]
SUDEEP RAI VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2021-4-6] [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA VS. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(CHH)-2014-9-15] [REFERRED TO]
SRI GOPAL SAHA AND 8 ORS. VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2020-2-152] [REFERRED TO]
BIKRAM BANIA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2023-11-25] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDERKAR AMARNATH VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2021-7-16] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HABIB KHAMISHA DAL [LAWS(GJH)-2023-1-1029] [REFERRED TO]
PILLA RAMO RAO VS. STATE OF A.P [LAWS(APH)-2023-5-73] [REFERRED TO]
GOVENDER SAVITHREE @ CINDY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2023-2-16] [REFERRED TO]
RAJU WILSON VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2023-1-100] [REFERRED TO]
RAVI PRATAP SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-7-18] [REFERRED TO]
MUNNI DEVI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-6-178] [REFERRED TO]
PINTU AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-9-54] [REFERRED TO]
ACHINTA DEKA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2024-6-27] [REFERRED TO]
HONBLE COURT IN ITS OWN MOTION VS. RAJU WILSON [LAWS(CAL)-2023-1-120] [REFERRED TO]
BINOD PRADHAN VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2019-12-12] [REFERRED TO]
SHEKHAR VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2019-11-37] [REFERRED TO]
NAZEER VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2015-4-96] [REFERRED TO]
SHANKARAYYA S/O. SHIVARUDRAYYA METI @ GANACHARYA AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O. TADAKOD, PIN 581 105 TQ & DIST: DHARWAD VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, KITTUR POLICE STATION, DIST: BELGAUM [LAWS(KAR)-2017-1-48] [REFERRED TO]
SAMUNDER SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-8-117] [REFERRED TO]
DHRUV KUMAR JAISWAL @ DHRUV PRASAD @ DHRUV SAO @ DHRUV SAH VS. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH C B I [LAWS(PAT)-2019-5-29] [REFERRED TO]
BANAVATH RAVI VS. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2016-2-43] [REFERRED TO]
SUKHDEV, S/O DAULAT CHOUDHARY VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2017-12-135] [REFERRED TO]
SANKAR ROY AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2016-1-14] [REFERRED TO]
JITENDRABHAI @ MANHARBHAI DEVJIBHAI VASAVA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2024-2-11] [REFERRED TO]
KADORI BADAI S/O KANNOO BADAIQ VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH! [LAWS(MPH)-2018-1-108] [REFERRED TO]
DEV SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-2-268] [REFERRED TO]
RUSTAM KHAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2019-5-133] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. SHAYARA WIFE OF SHRI ABDUL REHMAN B/C MUSALMAN, R/O NAYA TALAB, INSIDE NAGORI GATE, JODHPUR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2017-1-72] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 24th September, 2010 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No. 495 of 2005 maintaining their conviction and sentence under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC, the appellants have filed this appeal by special leave.
(2.)Brief history of the case, as per prosecution case, is that Anita Jaiswal (deceased) was married to Umakant (appellant No.1) and after six months of the marriage, her husband and in-laws started harassing her to bring money from her father whenever she visits her parental home and also made a demand of Rs.50,000/- as dowry. She was also subjected to torture and cruelty every now and then by the husband and in-laws. On 2nd August, 2003, within one and a half years of her marriage, the appellant No. 1 (husband) beat her with an iron rod before night and while she was going to take bath in the morning, he caught hold of her and allegedly poured kerosene on her body. Appellant No. 2 (mother-in-law) set her ablaze by lighting a match stick. The victim was immediately taken to Revival Medical Centre, Bhilai where appellant No. 2 stated to the Doctors that the victim sustained burn injuries due to accident (Ext. P-2) with a chimney (local lamp). The victim was treated at the Revival Medical Centre till 13th August, 2003 on which date, when the condition of the victim was getting deteriorated, the Revival Medical Centre intimated the police about the incident vide Ext. P-21. Immediately thereafter, F.I.R. (Ext. P-24) was registered by the ASI, PS Newai (PW23). Investigation was taken up by PWs 26 and 27, the Superintendent of Police and the Station House Officer respectively who also seized a bottle of kerosene oil, one wooden stool, one iron pipe etc., and a seizure memo was accordingly prepared. On 13th August, 2003 itself the victim's dying declaration (Ext. P-13) was also recorded by the Executive Magistrate (PW 12). The victim was then shifted to Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital & Research Centre, Bhilai for further treatment. However, on 7th September, 2003, during the course of her treatment, the victim died.
(3.)After the death of the deceased, investigation continued, witnesses were summoned, inquest was made, dead body was sent for autopsy, spot map was prepared. Having recorded statements of witnesses under Section 161, Cr.P.C., charge sheet was filed against the accused (husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law). The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class committed the case to the Court of Session. The learned Trial Judge framed charges against the accused under Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and under Sections 304B/34, 302/34 and 498-A, IPC. In their statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C. the accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. At the trial, they took the plea that the deceased died as a result of accident of chimney (local lamp) and they have been falsely implicated.
(2.)Brief history of the case, as per prosecution case, is that Anita Jaiswal (deceased) was married to Umakant (appellant No.1) and after six months of the marriage, her husband and in-laws started harassing her to bring money from her father whenever she visits her parental home and also made a demand of Rs.50,000/- as dowry. She was also subjected to torture and cruelty every now and then by the husband and in-laws. On 2nd August, 2003, within one and a half years of her marriage, the appellant No. 1 (husband) beat her with an iron rod before night and while she was going to take bath in the morning, he caught hold of her and allegedly poured kerosene on her body. Appellant No. 2 (mother-in-law) set her ablaze by lighting a match stick. The victim was immediately taken to Revival Medical Centre, Bhilai where appellant No. 2 stated to the Doctors that the victim sustained burn injuries due to accident (Ext. P-2) with a chimney (local lamp). The victim was treated at the Revival Medical Centre till 13th August, 2003 on which date, when the condition of the victim was getting deteriorated, the Revival Medical Centre intimated the police about the incident vide Ext. P-21. Immediately thereafter, F.I.R. (Ext. P-24) was registered by the ASI, PS Newai (PW23). Investigation was taken up by PWs 26 and 27, the Superintendent of Police and the Station House Officer respectively who also seized a bottle of kerosene oil, one wooden stool, one iron pipe etc., and a seizure memo was accordingly prepared. On 13th August, 2003 itself the victim's dying declaration (Ext. P-13) was also recorded by the Executive Magistrate (PW 12). The victim was then shifted to Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital & Research Centre, Bhilai for further treatment. However, on 7th September, 2003, during the course of her treatment, the victim died.
(3.)After the death of the deceased, investigation continued, witnesses were summoned, inquest was made, dead body was sent for autopsy, spot map was prepared. Having recorded statements of witnesses under Section 161, Cr.P.C., charge sheet was filed against the accused (husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law). The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class committed the case to the Court of Session. The learned Trial Judge framed charges against the accused under Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and under Sections 304B/34, 302/34 and 498-A, IPC. In their statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C. the accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. At the trial, they took the plea that the deceased died as a result of accident of chimney (local lamp) and they have been falsely implicated.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.