Allahabad High Court
Mukesh Kumar Rajpoot vs State Of U.P. on 11 April, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Reserved on 24.03.2022
Delivered on 11.04.2022
Court No. - 34
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3881 of 2019
Appellant :- Mukesh Kumar Rajpoot
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. This Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has arisen from judgment and order dated 06.04.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 11, Kanpur Nagar in Session Trial No. 591 of 2014 (State vs. Mukesh Kumar Rajpoot), arising out of Case Crime No. 122 of 2014, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Panki, District Kanpur Nagar, whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, one month additional imprisonment, under Section 498A IPC; ten years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304 B IPC; and, two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case default of payment of fine, one month additional imprisonment, under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
2. Learned counsel for appellant, at the outset, submits that appellant is not pressing this appeal with regard to order of conviction, however, he is only pressing this appeal qua to quantum of sentence which is maximum of ten years under Section 304B IPC on the ground that appellant has already undergone about eight years of sentence.
3. Learned counsel for appellant fairly submits that in the present case appellant the husband, was convicted under the aforesaid offence as her wife died in other than normal circumstances due to cruelty committed for demand of dowry within four years of her marriage. He also pointed out that there are anti mortem injuries on the dead body of deceased, however, Trial Court has not convicted appellant under the alternative charge made under Section 302 IPC.
4. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material on record as well as the written submission.
5. In the present case the minimum sentence under Section 304B IPC is 7 years imprisonment. Supreme Court in V.K. Mishra and another vs. State of Uttarakhand (2015) 9 SCC 588 under similar circumstances by upholding the conviction under Section 304B IPC, modified the sentence of life imprisonment to 10 years. Therefore, in the present case considering the mitigating circumstances that the incident occurred in the year 2014 and presently appellant has two minor daughters, who required parental love and affection and that appellant has already undergone more than the minimum sentence of seven years (according to jail records as on 28.03.2022 appellant has undergone 7 years, 9 months and four days and 8 years, 5 months and 25 days with remission), this Court is of the view that if the sentence of maximum 10 years be reduced to the period already undergone, the ends of justice would be served.
6. In the result, appeal is partly allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 06.04.2019, to the extent of conviction under Sections 498A IPC and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment wife fine of Rs. 5,000/- and two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/-, respectively, is confirmed. Conviction under Section 304B IPC is also confirmed but the sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment is modified to the extent of period already undergone.
7. Appellant-Mukesh Kumar Rajpoot, who is in jail, shall be released forthwith, if not wanted/ required in any other matter. His bail bonds are cancelled and sureties discharged.
8. Lower Court record alongwith a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to District Court concerned for compliance and further necessary action.
Order Date :- 11.04.2022
AK
