# Putan v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2022) 8 ILRA 611
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2022-07-07
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 138 of 2019
- **Bench:** Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/putan-v-state-of-u-p-48925
- **Pages:** 9

## Headnote

Criminal Law- Dowry Prohibition Act,
1961- Section 2 - In the present case,
there is alleged demand of tractor -
Interpretation of the word "dowry"- The
demand of tractor certainly come within
the purview of dowry.

Dowry is giving or receiving of any property or
valuable
security
in
connection
with the
marriage of the parties would include a tractor
also.

Indian Penal Code, 1860- Section 304- B -
Indian Evidence Act, 1872- Section 113-B-
The word "soon before" - It is not denied
that the deceased was married to the
accused-appellant barely, two months
before the alleged incident. Thus, in a
brief period of about two months' marital
life, any demand of tractor by the
accused-appellant is necessarily a demand
"soon before" the death of the deceased.

The expression "soon before" contemplates a
reasonable time and does not mean immediately
before. Hence demand of dowry two months
before the death of the wife would come within
the purview of the expression "soon before".

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304- B -
On the basis of cogent and reliable
testimonies of P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-4,
the prosecution has been able to prove
that the accused-appellant used to make
demand of tractor and due to nonfulfillment of such demand, he treated the
deceased with cruelty and ultimately
caused her death. The cause of death of
deceased,
according
to
post-mortem
report, is strangulation and her hyoid
bone is also found to be fractured. The
death of the deceased occurred in the
house of the accused-appellant within a
period of two months from the date of
marriage
of
the
deceased
with
the
accused-appellant.

Where the prosecution proves that the deceased
died an unnatural death within seven years of
her marriage and was subjected to cruelty soon
before her death in pursuance of demand of
dowry, then the same would invite conviction
u/s 304-B of the IPC. ( Para 19, 24, 25)

Criminal Appeal rejected. (E-3)

Judgements/ Case law relied upon-:

## Text

8 All. Putan Vs. State of U.P.
611
accused herein and thus this Court finds the
order of acquittal is liable to be affirmed.

55. In view of foregoing discussion,
the present appeal is liable to be dismissed
and is accordingly dismissed.

55. The records be sent back to the
court-below.
----------
(2022) 8 ILRA 611
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 07.07.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE AJAI KUMAR SRIVASTAVA-I, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 138 of 2019

Putan ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Appellant:
Soniya Mishra, Sri O.P. Tiwari, Sri Rajendra
Singh, Sri Rajiv Mishra

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
G.A.

Criminal Law- Dowry Prohibition Act,
1961- Section 2 - In the present case,
there is alleged demand of tractor -
Interpretation of the word "dowry"- The
demand of tractor certainly come within
the purview of dowry.

Dowry is giving or receiving of any property or
valuable
security
in
connection
with the
marriage of the parties would include a tractor
also.

Indian Penal Code, 1860- Section 304- B -
Indian Evidence Act, 1872- Section 113-B-
The word "soon before" - It is not denied
that the deceased was married to the
accused-appellant barely, two months
before the alleged incident. Thus, in a
brief period of about two months' marital
life, any demand of tractor by the
accused-appellant is necessarily a demand
"soon before" the death of the deceased.

The expression "soon before" contemplates a
reasonable time and does not mean immediately
before. Hence demand of dowry two months
before the death of the wife would come within
the purview of the expression "soon before".

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304- B -
On the basis of cogent and reliable
testimonies of P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-4,
the prosecution has been able to prove
that the accused-appellant used to make
demand of tractor and due to nonfulfillment of such demand, he treated the
deceased with cruelty and ultimately
caused her death. The cause of death of
deceased,
according
to
post-mortem
report, is strangulation and her hyoid
bone is also found to be fractured. The
death of the deceased occurred in the
house of the accused-appellant within a
period of two months from the date of
marriage
of
the
deceased
with
the
accused-appellant.

Where the prosecution proves that the deceased
died an unnatural death within seven years of
her marriage and was subjected to cruelty soon
before her death in pursuance of demand of
dowry, then the same would invite conviction
u/s 304-B of the IPC. ( Para 19, 24, 25)

Criminal Appeal rejected. (E-3)

Judgements/ Case law relied upon-:

1. Nallam Veera Stayanandam & ors Vs Public
Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. (2004) 10 SCC
769

2. Satvir Singh & ors Vs St. of Punj. & anr
(2001) 8 SCC 633

3. Hira Lal & ors. Vs St. (Govt.NCT) Delhi (2003)
8 SCC 80

4. Rajinder Singh Vs St. of Punj. (2015) 6 SCC
477
612 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
5. Surinder Singh Vs St. of Har. (2014) 4 SCC
129

6. Sher Singh Vs St. of Har. 2015 (1) SCALE 250

7. Dinesh Vs St. of Har. 2014 (5) SCALE 641
(Delivered by Hon'ble Ajai Kumar
Srivastava-I, J.)

1. Heard Sri O. P. Tiwari, learned
counsel for the accused-appellant, Sri
Rajesh Kumar Singh and Sri Alok Saran,
learned A.G.A. for the State and perused
the record.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the
judgment and order dated 04.09.2018
passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Court No.9, Unnao in Sessions Trial
No.54/2015, arising out of Crime No.1902
of 2014, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C.
& Section 4 of D. P. Act, Police Station
Gangaghat, District Unnao whereby the
appellant has been convicted and sentenced
for a period of three years' rigorous
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.8,000/- for
the offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. and
in default of payment of fine, he has further
been directed to undergo three months'
additional imprisonment. He has also been
convicted and sentenced for a period of ten
years' rigorous imprisonment for the
offence under Section 304B I.P.C. He has
also been convicted and sentenced for a
period of two years' rigorous imprisonment
with a fine of Rs.6000/- for the offence
under Section 4 of D. P. Act and in default
of payment of fine, he has further been
directed to undergo two months' additional
simple imprisonment. All the sentences
were directed

3. Brief facts of this case are that the
first informant, Pyare Lal submitted a
written report, Ex. Ka-1 to Kotwali, Unnao
stating therein that his sister, Phoolmati was
married to the appellant, Putan two months'
ago according to Hindu Rites and they
resided in Mohalla Srinagar, Police StationGangaghat. His sister was being treated
with cruelty quite offenly by the accusedappellant and his family members for nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. This fact
was communicated to the first informant by
his sister telephonically. The appellant also
used to extent threat to the deceased due to
non-fulfillment of a tractor. On 01.10.2014,
the landlord of his sister, Smt. Sushila
informed the first informant on telephone
that his sister has been burnt.

4. On the basis of aforesaid written
report, Ex. Ka-1, Crime No.1902 of 2014,
under Sections 498A and 304-B I.P.C. read
with 3⁄4 Dowry Prohibition Act came to be
lodged against the accused-appellant on
01.10.2014 at 12:15 P.M. at Police Station
Gangaghat.

5. Investigating Officer, P.W.-7, S. I.
Manoj
Kumar Awasthi
recorded
the
statements of witnesses under Section 161
Cr.P.C. He visited the place of occurrence
and prepared a site plan, Ex. Ka-12. Due to
transfer of said Investigating Officer, P.W.-
6, C. O., Sri Gopi Nath Soni under took the
investigation.
He
also
recorded
the
statements of some of the prosecution
witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and
upon conclusion of investigation, he
submitted the charge sheet, Ex. Ka-6
against the accused-appellant.

6. In order to bring home guilt of the
accused-appellant, the prosecution has
examined P.W.-1, Pyare Lal, P.W.-2,
Bachhu, P.W.-3, Nayab Tehsildar, Renuka
Awasthi, P.W.-4, Dr. Sanjay Kumar, P.W.-5,
Rampal
Singh,
P.W.-6,
Investigating
Officer, Sri Gopi Nath Soni and P.W.-7,
8 All. Putan Vs. State of U.P.
613
Investigating
Officer,
Manoj
Kumar
Awasthi.

7. The accused-appellant, in his
statement recorded under Section 313
Cr.P.C., has stated himself to be innocent
and has also stated to have been falsely
implicated in this case. The accusedappellant was charged under Sections
498A, 304B I.P.C. & 4 D. P. Act and also
charged, in alternate, under Section 302
I.P.C. to which he denied and claimed to be
tried.

8. In defence, a copy of judgment of
A.C.J.M., Court No.5 rendered in Criminal
Case No.1017 of 2013 "Phoolmati vs.
Pradeep Kumar & Ors.", under Sections
498, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. read with Section
3⁄4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.-Kotwali
Sadar, Unnao was filed.

9. The post-mortem on the cadaver of
the deceased was conducted by a panel of
doctors consisting of Dr. Sanjay Kumar,
P.W.-4 and Dr. R. K. Raman on 02.10.2014.

10. According to post-mortem report,
Ex. Ka-3, the entire body of the deceased
was having superficial to skin deep burn
injuries and hyoid bone was found to be
fractured. The cause of death of deceased,
according to post-mortem report, Ex. Ka-3.
is strangulation due to injury no.2 i.e.
broken hyoid bone.

11. Learned counsel for the accusedappellant has submitted that the accusedappellant is innocent, who has been falsely
implicated in this case. He never demanded
dowry nor did he treat the deceased with
cruelty. She further submits that the
deceased
committed
suicide
due
to
frustration
and
depression.
She
also
submits is that the conviction of the
accused-appellant recorded by learned trial
Court is against the weight of evidence
available on record which is perverse and
deserves to be set aside.

12. Per contra, Sri Rajesh Kumar
Singh and Sri Alok Saran, learned A.G.A.
for the State have vehemently submitted
that the accused-appellant is husband of the
deceased. The deceased was living with the
appellant in Mohalla Srinagar, Police
Station-Gangaghat. She was done to death
within two months from her marriage by
the
accused-appellant
due
to
nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. The cause
of death of the deceased, according to postmortem report, is strangulation and broken
hyoid bone which cannot be caused by the
deceased
herself.
The
offence
was
committed in a brutal manner. The
deceased was reported to be pregnant also.
Since the deceased died in the house of the
accused-appellant,
therefore,
the
presumption under Section 106 of Indian
Evidence Act is also to be drawn against
the accused-appellant. They have submitted
that the prosecution has successfully
proved its case against the accusedappellant under Sections 498A & 304B
I.P.C. and Section 4 D. P. Act. Thus, the
impugned judgment and order is well
discussed
and
reasoned
wherein
no
interference by this Court is warranted.

13. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the
case of Nallam Veera Stayanandam and
others vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court
of A.P. reported in (2004) 10 SCC 769 has
held as under :-

"We have heard learned counsel
and also perused the records. It is true from
the evidence led by the prosecution it has
been able to establish that the appellants
were demanding dowry which was a
614 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
harassment to the deceased. It is also true
that the death of the deceased occurred
within 7 years of the marriage, therefore, a
presumption under Section 113-B of the
Evidence
Act
is
available
to
the
prosecution, therefore, it is for the defence
in this case to discharge the onus and
establish that the death of the deceased in
all probability did not occur because of
suicide but was an accidental death."

14 . In the case of Satvir Singh and
others vs. State of Punjab and another
reported in (2001) 8 SCC 633 the Hon'ble
Apex Court has held as under:-

""The essential components of
Section 304-B are: (i) Death of a woman
occurring otherwise than under normal
circumstance, within 7 years of marriage, (ii)
Soon before her death she should have been
subjected to cruetly and harassment in
connection with any demand for dowry.
When the above ingredients are fulfilled, the
husband or his relative, who subjected her to
such cruelty or harassment, can be presumed
to be guilty of offence Under Section 304-B.
To be within the province of the first
ingredient the provision stipulates that "where
the death of a woman is caused by any burns
or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than
under normal circumstance". It may appear
that the former limb which is described by
the words "death caused by burns or bodily
injury" is a redundancy because such death
would also fall within the wider province of
"death caused otherwise than under normal
circumstances". The former limb was inserted
for highlighting that by no means death
caused by burns or bodily injury should be
treated as falling outside the ambit of the
offence".

15. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Hira Lal and others vs. State
(Govt.NCT) Delhi reported in (2003) 8
SCC 80 has held as under:-

"A conjoint reading of Section
113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304B Indian Penal Code shows that there must
be material to show that soon before her
death the victim was subjected to cruelty or
harassment. The prosecution has to rule
out the possibility of a natural or
accidental death so as to bring it within the
purview of "death occurring otherwise than
in normal circumstances". The expression
"soon before" is very relevant where
Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and
Section 304-B Indian Penal Code are
pressed into service. The prosecution is
obliged to show that soon before the
occurrence there was cruelty or harassment
and only in that case presumption operates.
Evidence in that regard has to be led by the
prosecution".

16. The Hon'ble Apex Court, while
proceeding further and interpreting the
expression "soon before", opined thus:-

"The determination of the period
which can come within the term "soon
before" is left to be determined by the
courts,
depending
upon
facts
and
circumstances
of
each
case.
Suffice,
however, to indicate that the expression
"soon before" would normally imply that
the interval should not be much between
the cruelty or harassment concerned and
the death in question. There must be
existence of a proximate and live link
between the effect of cruelty based on
dowry demand and the death concerned. If
the alleged incident of cruelty is remote in
time and has become stale enough not to
disturb the mental equilibrium of the
woman concerned, it would be of no
consequence".
8 All. Putan Vs. State of U.P.
615

17. It is relevant to refer here the
provision of Section 113-A and 113-B of
the Evidence Act, which read as under:-

"113-A.
Presumption
as
to
abetment of suicide by a married
woman,- When the question is whether
the commission of suicide by a woman
had been abetted by her husband or any
relative of her husband and it is shown
that she had committed suicide within a
period of seven years from the date of her
marriage and that her husband or such
relative of her husband had subjected her
to cruelty, the Court may presume, having
regard to all the other circumstances of
the case, that such suicide had been
abetted by her husband or by such
relative of her husband.

Section 113-B, which provides
for presumption as to dowry death, was
inserted with a view to fight against the
plague
of
dowry
death.
The
said
provision is as follows:-

113-B Presumption as to dowry
death.

When the question is whether a
person has committed the dowry death of
a woman and it is shown that soon before
her death such woman has been subjected
by such person to cruelty or harassment
for, or in connection with, any demand
for dowry, the Court shall presume that
such person had caused the dowry
death."

18. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a
recent judgment rendered in Rajinder
Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in
(2015) 6 SCC 477 has interpreted the
word "dowry" as defined in Section 2 of
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 as follows:-

"A perusal of this Section shows
that this definition can be broken into six
distinct parts.

1) Dowry must first consist of any
property or valuable security - the word
"any" is a word of width and would,
therefore, include within it property and
valuable security of any kind whatsoever.

2) Such property or security can
be given or even agreed to be given. The
actual giving of such property or security
is, therefore, not necessary.

3) Such property or security can
be given or agreed to be given either
directly or indirectly.

4) Such giving or agreeing to give
can again be not only by one party to a
marriage to the other but also by the
parents of either party or by any other
person to either party to the marriage or to
any other person. It will be noticed that this
clause again widens the reach of the Act
insofar as those guilty of committing the
offence of giving or receiving dowry is
concerned.

5) Such giving or agreeing to give
can be at any time. It can be at, before, or
at any time after the marriage. Thus, it can
be many years after a marriage is
solemnised.

6) Such giving or receiving must
be in connection with the marriage of the
parties. Obviously, the expression "in
connection with" would in the context of
the social evil sought to be tackled by the
Dowry Prohibition Act mean "in relation
with" or "relating to".

19. In the present case, there is
alleged demand of tractor. In view of the
616 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
aforesaid
interpretation
of
the
word
"dowry", the demand of tractor certainly
come within the purview of dowry.

20. As far as ingredients of offence
under Section 304-B I.P.C. are concerned,
it is settled law that there are four
ingredients and Hon'ble Apex Court in
Rajinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra)
has again reiterated the said settled
principles of law, which is as follows:-

"The ingredients of the offence
under Section 304B have been stated and
restated in many judgments. There are four
such ingredients and they are said to be:

(a) death of a woman must have
been caused by any burns or bodily injury
or her death must have occurred otherwise
than under normal circumstances;

(b)
such
death
must
have
occurred within seven years of her
marriage;

(c) soon before her death, she
must have been subjected to cruelty or
harassment by her husband or any relative
of her husband; and

(d) such cruelty or harassment
must be in connection with the demand for
dowry.

This has been the law stated in
the following judgments:

Ashok
Kumar
vs.
Stateof
Haryana, (2010) 12 SCC 350 at pages 360361; Bachni Devi & Anr. v. State of
Haryana, (2011) 4 SCC 427 at 431, Pathan
Hussain Basha v. State of A.P., (2012) 8
SCC 594 at 599, Kulwant Singh & Ors. v.
State of Punjab, (2013) 4 SCC 177 at 184185, Surinder Singh v. State of Haryana,
(2014) 4 SCC 129 at 137, Raminder Singh
v. State of Punjab, (2014) 12 SCC 582 at
583, Suresh Singh v. State of Haryana,
(2013) 16 SCC 353 at 361, Sher Singh v.
State of Haryana, 2015 1 SCALE 250 at
262."

21. The word "soon before" appearing
in Section 113-B of Indian Evidence Act,
1872 also in Section 304-B I.P.C. have also
been the subject matter of challenge in
every case of dowry death. Hon'ble the
Apex Court in Surinder Singh v. State of
Haryana reported in (2014) 4 SCC 129,
has again interpreted the said "soon before"
as under:

"17. Thus, the words "soon
before" appear in Section 113-B of the
Evidence Act, 1872 and also in Section
304-B
IPC.
For
the
presumptions
contemplated under these sections to spring
into action, it is necessary to show that the
cruelty or harassment was caused soon
before the death. The interpretation of the
words
"soon
before"
is,
therefore,
important. The question is how "soon
before"? This would obviously depend on
the facts and circumstances of each case.
The cruelty or harassment differs from case
to case. It relates to the mindset of people
which varies from person to person.
Cruelty can be mental or it can be physical.
Mental cruelty is also of different shades. It
can be verbal or emotional like insulting or
ridiculing or humiliating a woman. It can
be giving threats of injury to her or her
near and dear ones. It can be depriving her
of
economic
resources
or
essential
amenities of life. It can be putting restraints
on her movements. It can be not allowing
her to talk to the outside world. The list is
illustrative and not exhaustive. Physical
cruelty could be actual beating or causing
8 All. Putan Vs. State of U.P.
617
pain and harm to the person of a woman.
Every such instance of cruelty and related
harassment has a different impact on the
mind of a woman. Some instances may be
so grave as to have a lasting impact on a
woman. Some instances which degrade her
dignity may remain etched in her memory
for a long time. Therefore, "soon before" is
a relative term. In matters of emotions we
cannot have fixed formulae. The time-lag
may differ from case to case. This must be
kept in mind while examining each case of
dowry death.

18. In this connection we may
refer to the judgment of this Court in Kans
Raj v. State of Punjab, [(2000) 5 SCC 207 :
2000 SCC (Cri) 935] where this Court
considered the term "soon before". The
relevant observations are as under: (SCC
pp. 222- 23, para 15) "15. ... 'Soon before'
is a relative term which is required to be
considered under specific circumstances of
each case and no straitjacket formula can
be laid down by fixing any time-limit. This
expression is pregnant with the idea of
proximity test. The term 'soon before' is not
synonymous with the term 'immediately
before' and is opposite of the expression
'soon after' as used and understood in
Section 114, Illustration (a) of the Evidence
Act. These words would imply that the
interval should not be too long between the
time of making the statement and the death.
It contemplates the reasonable time which,
as earlier noticed, has to be understood
and
determined
under
the
peculiar
circumstances of each case. In relation to
dowry deaths, the circumstances showing
the existence of cruelty or harassment to
the deceased are not restricted to a
particular instance but normally refer to a
course of conduct. Such conduct may be
spread over a period of time. If the cruelty
or harassment or demand for dowry is
shown to have persisted, it shall be deemed
to be 'soon before death' if any other
intervening circumstance showing the nonexistence of such treatment is not brought
on record, before such alleged treatment
and the date of death. It does not, however,
mean that such time can be stretched to any
period. Proximate and live link between the
effect of cruelty based on dowry demand
and the consequential death is required to
be proved by the prosecution. The demand
of dowry, cruelty or harassment based upon
such demand and the date of death should
not be too remote in time which, under the
circumstances, be treated as having become
stale enough.

Thus, there must be a nexus
between the demand of dowry, cruelty or
harassment, based upon such demand and
the date of death. The test of proximity will
have to be applied. But, it is not a rigid test.
It depends on the facts and circumstances
of each case and calls for a pragmatic and
sensitive approach of the court within the
confines of law."

22. Hon'ble the Apex Court in Sher
Singh vs. State of Haryana reported in
2015 (1) SCALE 250, has further held as
under:

"We are aware that the word
'soon' finds place in Section 304-B; but we
would prefer to interpret its use not in
terms of days or months or years, but as
necessarily indicating that the demand for
dowry should not be stale or an aberration
of the past, but should be the continuing
cause for the death under Section 304-B or
the suicide under Section 306 of the IPC.
Once the presence of these concomitants
are established or shown or proved by the
prosecution, even by preponderance of
possibility, the initial presumption of
618 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
innocence is replaced by an assumption of
guilt of the accused, thereupon transferring
the heavy burden of proof upon him and
requiring
him
to
produce
evidence
dislodging his guilt, beyond reasonable
doubt."

23. Hon'ble the Apex Court in
Rajinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra)
has distinguished the law laid down in
Dinesh vs. State of Haryana reported in
2014 (5) SCALE 641, in the following
terms:

"The expression "soon before" is
a relative term as held by this Court, which
is required to be considered under the
specific circumstances of each case and no
straight jacket formula can be laid down by
fixing any time of allotment. It can be said
that the term "soon before" is synonyms
with the term "immediately before". The
determination of the period which can
come within term "soon before" is left to be
determined by courts depending upon the
facts and circumstances of each case."

We hasten to add that this is not a
correct reflection of the law. "Soon before"
is not synonymous with "immediately
before".

24. Adverting to the facts of the case
at hand, upon a survey of prosecution
evidence, this Court finds that the P.W.-1,
Pyare Lal, who is brother of the deceased
and P.W.-2, Bachhu Lal who is father of
deceased, have very clearly stated that the
accused-appellant used to make demand of
tractor and due to non-fulfillment of such
demand, the decease was treated with
cruelty by the accused-appellant. The
deceased used to tell her brother and father
about this fact. This Court is conscious of
the fact that it is not denied that the
deceased was married to the accusedappellant barely, two months before the
alleged incident. Thus, in a brief period of
about two months' marital life, any demand
of tractor by the accused-appellant is
necessarily a demand "soon before" the
death of the deceased. The cause of death
of the deceased, according to post-mortem
report, Ex. Ka-3 which has been duly
proved by P.W.-4, Dr. Sanjay Kumar is
strangulation. Her hyoid bone is also
reported to be fractured. This injury cannot
be caused by the deceased herself.

25. P.w.-4, Dr. Sanjay Kumar has also
stated that in case of anti mortem hanging
the thyroid cartilage cannot get fractured.
Thus, on the basis of cogent and reliable
testimonies of P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-4,
the prosecution has been able to prove that
the accused-appellant used to make demand
of tractor and due to non-fulfillment of
such demand, he treated the deceased with
cruelty and ultimately caused her death.
The cause of death of deceased, according
to post-mortem report, is strangulation and
her hyoid bone is also found to be
fractured. The death of the deceased
occurred in the house of the accusedappellant within a period of two months
from the date of marriage of the deceased
with the accused-appellant.

26. Accordingly, this Court does not
find any illegality or perversity in the
impugned judgment and order dated
04.09.2018. The findings of guilt of the
accused-appellant under Sections 304-B &
498A I.P.C. and Section 4 of D. P. Act are
liable to be affirmed, which are accordingly
affirmed.

27. However, keeping in view the fact
that there is nothing on record to suggest
that the accused-appellant had any previous
8 All. Kanta Vs. State
619
criminal history and also that he is aged
about 40 years and having regard to the fact
that the accused-appellant is in jail since
conviction and is serving out the sentence
awarded to him, the sentence awarded to
the accused-appellant under Section 304-B
I.P.C. is liable to be modified from ten
years' rigorous imprisonment to seven
years' rigorous imprisonment only.

28.

Accordingly,
the
sentence
awarded to the accused-appellant under
Section 304-B I.P.C. is modified from ten
years' rigorous imprisonment to seven
years' rigorous imprisonment only. The
conviction under Section 498A I.P.C. and
awarding of sentence for three years'
rigorous imprisonment with a fine of
Rs.8000/-, ten years' rigorous imprisonment
under Section 304B I.P.C. and two years'
rigorous imprisonment with a fine of
Rs.6000/-
under
Section
4
Dowry
Prohibition Act are also affirmed.

29. With the aforesaid modification,
the instant jail appeal deserves to be partly
allowed.

30. The instant jail appeal is partly
allowed as indicated above.

31. Let the appellant be released
forthwith, if he has already undergone the
sentences awarded to him as aforesaid
provided he is not wanted in any other
criminal case.

31. Let a copy of this judgment along
with lower Court record, if any, be sent to
learned trial Court for information and
necessary compliance.
----------
(2022) 8 ILRA 619
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 26.08.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 549 of 1983

Kanta ...Appellant
Versus
State ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri H.R. Misra, Amicus Curiae, Sri Pankaj
Kumar Asthana, Sri Vrindavan Mishra

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
A.G.A.

Criminal Law- Indian Evidence Act, 1872-
Section 3- It is to be noted that the
absence of blood on the spot is of no
consequence
in
the
facts
and
circumstances of the case where there is
no doubt with regard to actual occurrence
having taken place and about the place
where it took place. It is emerging from
the record that the place was an open
public place accessible to the public at
large and plausible explanation has been
given by Prosecution Witness No. 1 with
regard to non-availability of blood stains
when the Investigating Officer visited the
place of occurrence and as such the
prosecution story cannot be discarded on
the aforesaid ground.

Merely because no blood stains were recovered
from the place of the occurrence, which was an
open public place, would not affect the case of
the prosecution.

Section 134- A witness is normally to be
considered independent unless he or she
springs from sources which are likely to
be tainted and that usually means unless
the witness has cause, such as enmity
against the accused, to wish to implicate
him falsely. Ordinarily a close relative
would be the last to screen the real
culprit and falsely implicate an innocent