Vinod Prasad, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned Counsel for the Appellant and the learned A.G.A. Admit. Summon the trial court record.
(2.) THE Appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. 67 of 2009, State v. Lakshman and others, Crime No. 379 of 2008, under Section 306, 498 -A IPC, P.S. Madnapur, District Shahjahanpur and the maximum sentence awarded to him is seven years RI. The rest of the sentences are lesser sentences and all the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. It is contended by learned Counsel for the Appellant that on the strength of internal page 6, 7 and 8 of the impugned judgment parents of the deceased categorically stated before the court that there was no demand of dowry nor the deceased lodged any complaint regarding that, and she was suffering from tuberculosis and was even got medically treated by the husband and in -laws and therefore recorded conviction under Section 306 IPC is not sustainable. He further submitted that once the trial Judge acquitted co -accused persons with identical allegations for the offence under Section 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, there was no occasion for it to convict the Appellant only for the charge under Section 306 and 498A IPC. He further submitted that Appellant was on bail during the trial, which liberty he has not misused. He further contended that appeal is not likely to be heard in near future. He further contended that as on date he has already undergone near about three years of imprisonment and maximum sentence is seven years.
(3.) LEARNED AGA however endeavoured to support the judgment and refuted the arguments.;