Sunil Kumar Lohani vs The State Of Jharkhand And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 9378 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sunil Kumar Lohani vs The State Of Jharkhand And Another on 20 September, 2024

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                Cr. Rev. No. 1435 of 2016

                Sunil Kumar Lohani                            ...      ...     Petitioner
                                         Versus
                The State of Jharkhand and Another
                                                ...         ...        Opposite Parties
                                         ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

                For the Petitioner        : Mr. A. S. Dayal, Advocate
                                          : Mr. P.S. Dayal, Advocate
                                          : Ms. Supriya Dayal, Advocate
                For the State             : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, APP
                                          ---

09/20.09.2024         Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although there are concurrent findings recorded by both the learned Courts, but the impugned judgments of conviction are perverse and call for interference.

3. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner being the husband has been convicted for offence under section 498A of Indian Penal Code and section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of three years under section 498A of Indian Penal Code with fine of Rs. 2000/- and to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of one year under section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act with fine of Rs. 1000/-.

4. While assailing the impugned judgements, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner faced the trial with other family members and there were general and omnibus allegation against all the persons relating to the incident at Gaya. He submits that the only allegation in connection with the incident at Jhumri Telaiya i.e. the parental house of the informant- wife was that the petitioner had left her at Jhumri Telaiya while she was pregnant when the demand of dowry of Rs. 1 lakh was not satisfied.

5. Learned counsel further submits that it was stated in the First Information Report that the petitioner had assaulted the informant in Jhumri Telaiya as well, but such incident at Jhumri Telaiya was not proved by the prosecution and no specific question was put to the petitioner under section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with the incident at Jhumri Telaiya , still the learned trial Court convicted the petitioner only by referring to the allegations made in the First Information Report.

6. Learned counsel submits that the investigating officer had not made any investigation in connection with the alleged incident at Gaya and all other co-accused persons were acquitted except the petitioner by referring to the allegation at Jhumri Telaiya .

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party- State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that there are concurrent findings recorded by both the learned Courts and there is no scope for re-appreciation of evidence in revisional stage. He has also submitted that the petitioner has been rightly convicted based on materials on record and the sentence awarded to the petitioner is also appropriate.

8. Arguments concluded.

9. Order reserved.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Pankaj