MANGAT RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
LAWS(SC)-2014-3-64
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on
March 27,2014
MANGAT RAM
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. JAGDEV SINGH TALWANDI [REFERRED TO]STATE OF PUNJAB VS. SURINDERKUMAR [REFERRED TO]
HANS RAJ VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
ZAHIRA HABIBULLA H SHEIKH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
PINAKIN MAHIPATRAY RAWAL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
JAYDEEPSINH PRAVINSINH CHAVDA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2023-6-1088] [REFERRED TO]ARVIND KHIMABHAI PARMAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2024-4-69] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVINSINH HARISINH CHAVDA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2023-7-10] [REFERRED TO]
GAUTAM PAUL VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2022-9-79] [REFERRED TO]
B. L. CHANDRAKALA VS. K. N. RAVI KUMAR S/O. VEMANNA [LAWS(KAR)-2021-2-78] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. VALIBEN,W/O VIJANAND AAHIR [LAWS(GJH)-2015-2-105] [REFERRED TO]
UPENDRASINGH VISHWANATHSINGH RAJPUT VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2016-8-150] [REFERRED]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SHARAD RAMDAS SHELAR [LAWS(BOM)-2020-11-38] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HITESH RATILAL ZALA [LAWS(GJH)-2015-2-141] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORE S/O. RANGNATH JADHAV & ORS. VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-10-207] [REFERRED TO]
NARAYAN DEVANGAN VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH) [LAWS(CHH)-2017-9-46] [REFERRED TO]
RAMA AND ORS. VS. STATE OF M.P. (NOW C.G.) [LAWS(CHH)-2014-9-22] [REFERRED TO]
ONKAR KRISHAN VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2021-8-90] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. PRAFULKUMAR CHIMANLAL VYAS [LAWS(GJH)-2015-7-199] [REFERRED]
STATE VS. SANJAY SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2018-1-137] [REFERRED TO]
WASIM VS. STATE OF NCT DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2018-5-56] [REFERRED TO]
LAKHAN, S/O HARI VS. STATE OF M P (NOW CHHATTISGARH) THROUGH POLICE STA [LAWS(CHH)-2018-5-30] [REFERRED TO]
SUNKAPPA HANAMAPPA BIDARI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-7-289] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNARAJ VS. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2017-2-107] [REFERRED TO]
PAWAN KUMAR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-1-36] [REFERRED TO]
BARIKRAO VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2023-2-43] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH S/O SAKHARAM SHEWARE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2017-9-124] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SURESHKUMAR HIRABHAI PRAJAPATI [LAWS(GJH)-2017-3-423] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. ACHUBA W/O RINAJI SODHA [LAWS(GJH)-2015-3-420] [REFERRED]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. TALAB JAKU BHOKAL [LAWS(GJH)-2015-3-306] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RAJENDRA DATTARAM TALVADE [LAWS(GJH)-2015-3-193] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MAHESHBHAI GAGJIBHAI PATEL AND ORS. [LAWS(GJH)-2015-9-52] [REFERRED TO]
SHAISTA & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-1-455] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SAHU, S/O SHRI KRISHNA LAL SAHU VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(CHH)-2017-4-20] [REFERRED TO]
DHANANJAI DHANNA VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2020-8-35] [REFERRED TO]
NAGWANT PRASAD GUPTA SON OF SURESH PRASAD VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2023-11-53] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. PRASHANTH [LAWS(KAR)-2022-11-695] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MODI KANAIYALAL MULCHANDDAS [LAWS(GJH)-2022-12-1348] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN PARYADATH VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2020-9-241] [REFERRED TO]
NEELAVATHI VS. INSPECTOR OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2023-2-224] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAYKUMAR SHANTILAL PANCHAL AND ORS. VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2016-2-162] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. BHARAT GOVINDBHAI SAMANI [LAWS(GJH)-2015-2-138] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MAHESHBHAI BABUBHAI VAGHARI & 2 [LAWS(GJH)-2015-7-171] [REFERRED]
DHANAU DAS AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF M.P. (NOW C.G.) [LAWS(CHH)-2017-11-107] [REFERRED TO]
SANDEEP BHATT VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2023-9-99] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MOSIN HUSENBHAI BHODA [LAWS(GJH)-2023-6-1127] [REFERRED TO]
GURCHARAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-2020-10-9] [REFERRED TO]
AASHISH VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2018-2-252] [REFERRED TO]
NAGARAJ VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2014-10-186] [REFERRED TO]
RUKHMAJI S/O. DEVRAO GALANDE VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2017-3-200] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. KANTILAL VALLABHAJI BHOGAYATA [LAWS(GJH)-2017-3-320] [REFERRED TO]
APPASAHEB S/O GORAKHNATH KAKADE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-6-11] [REFERRED TO]
VINOD RAMCHANDRA JADHAV VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-7-24] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORE RANGNATH JADHAV AND ORS. VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-8-294] [REFERRED TO]
PRABHAWATI DEVI AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-1-128] [REFERRED TO]
KUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2021-12-137] [REFERRED TO]
SATISH SHETTY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2016-6-4] [REFERRED TO]
SARATHKUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2022-9-168] [REFERRED TO]
ASHRAF ALI VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2018-11-90] [REFERRED TO]
SHANMUGANANDHAM VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2023-3-106] [REFERRED TO]
PANCHAMLAL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH) [LAWS(CHH)-2019-8-17] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. JAYENDRAKUMAR @ JAYESH PALABHAI [LAWS(GJH)-2015-4-92] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. DILIPKUMAR JIVANLAL SOLANKI [LAWS(GJH)-2015-2-104] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RAFIQ DHANVARBHAI MEMON [LAWS(GJH)-2015-4-328] [REFERRED]
LAKHANLAL ROMKISHOR PATALBANSHI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2017-9-212] [REFERRED TO]
KASHIBAI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2023-2-84] [REFERRED TO]
RAMO DEVI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2016-6-8] [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. B.RAJ SHARMA & ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2017-2-51] [REFERRED TO]
CHETAN VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(CHH)-2022-9-106] [REFERRED TO]
SANT RAM VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2018-11-104] [REFERRED TO]
HARIBANDHU VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (NOW CHHATTISGARH) [LAWS(CHH)-2018-12-72] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. VALLABHBHAI LAKHABHAI GEVARIYA [LAWS(GJH)-2015-3-210] [REFERRED TO]
MANILAL DEVJIBHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2015-2-208] [REFERRED TO]
S. SADASHIVAPPA VS. STATE BY DANDINA SHIVARA POLICE STATION [LAWS(KAR)-2021-9-266] [REFERRED TO]
AAKASH GANESHBHAI MAKWANA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2024-4-65] [REFERRED TO]
SATPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2017-8-73] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH KUMAR AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2017-5-193] [REFERRED TO]
AJAYAKUMAR VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-7-377] [REFERRED TO]
ANTHONY K RAJU R/O ANNAPURNAWADI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-6-658] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. ANANTKUMAR CHANDULAL KANOJIYA [LAWS(GJH)-2023-3-834] [REFERRED TO]
SHAIK HUSSAIN BEE VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2023-8-67] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF H.P. VS. BALDEV SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-2016-5-3] [REFERRED TO]
ASHWIN KHODABHAI PIPARIYA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2015-3-213] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. JAYANTIBHAI MANGABHAI CHAVDA & OTHER [LAWS(GJH)-2015-2-249] [REFERRED TO]
SATISHRAJ S/O GAUTAM RAMTEKE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH P S O BALLARSHA, DIS [LAWS(BOM)-2018-6-33] [REFERRED TO]
DAGADU S/O. WALUBA JADHAV VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2017-4-124] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)The appellant Mangat Ram, a member of SC community, married the deceased Seema, a member of the Aggarwal community on 13.7.1993 at Ambala. Few months after the marriage, on 15.9.1993, according to the prosecution, the appellant sprinkled kerosene oil on the body of the deceased and set her on fire, having failed to meet the dowry demand. On hearing the hue and cry, neighbours assembled and took her to the Civil Hospital, Gohana and, later, she was shifted to the Medical College and Hospital, Rohtak, where she died on 17.9.1993. The appellant, along with his parents and sister, were charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 498- A and 304-B IPC.
(2.)The prosecution, in order to bring home the offences, examined PWs 1 to 7 and also produced various documents. On the side of defence, DWs 1 to 5 were examined and the accused appellant got himself examined as DW6. After the evidence was closed, the accused was questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), who denied all the incriminating statements made against him. The trial Court, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that an offence under Section 498-A IPC was made out against the appellant, but not against the other three accused persons. The trial Court also found that no offence under Section 304-B IPC was made out against the accused persons, including the appellant. However, it was held that an offence under Section 306 IPC was made out against the appellant, though no charge was framed under that section. After holding the appellant guilty, the trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 498-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- , in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for six months.
The appellant was also convicted under Section 306 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/-, in default, to further undergo RI for two years.
(3.)Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court, the appellant preferred Criminal Appeal No. 592-SB of 1997, which when came up for hearing before the Division Bench of the High Court on 3.5.2007, the Court passed the following order:
"Present: Mrs. Ritu Punj, DAG, Haryana Mrs. Harpreet Kaur Dhillon, Advocate is appointed as Amicus Curiae.
Heard
Dismissed, reasons to follow."
(2.)The prosecution, in order to bring home the offences, examined PWs 1 to 7 and also produced various documents. On the side of defence, DWs 1 to 5 were examined and the accused appellant got himself examined as DW6. After the evidence was closed, the accused was questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), who denied all the incriminating statements made against him. The trial Court, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that an offence under Section 498-A IPC was made out against the appellant, but not against the other three accused persons. The trial Court also found that no offence under Section 304-B IPC was made out against the accused persons, including the appellant. However, it was held that an offence under Section 306 IPC was made out against the appellant, though no charge was framed under that section. After holding the appellant guilty, the trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 498-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- , in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for six months.
The appellant was also convicted under Section 306 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/-, in default, to further undergo RI for two years.
(3.)Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court, the appellant preferred Criminal Appeal No. 592-SB of 1997, which when came up for hearing before the Division Bench of the High Court on 3.5.2007, the Court passed the following order:
"Present: Mrs. Ritu Punj, DAG, Haryana Mrs. Harpreet Kaur Dhillon, Advocate is appointed as Amicus Curiae.
Heard
Dismissed, reasons to follow."
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.