Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mamta And Ors. vs The State Of M.P.Z on 11 December, 2023
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 11 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1819 of 2003
BETWEEN:-
1. MAMTA W/O SURESH VANSHI, AGED ABOUT 22
YEARS, R/O GRAM LAGHT, BAMHORI THANA,
SOHAGPUR DISTRICT HOSHANGABAD (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SURESH S/O BABULAL VANSHI, AGED ABOUT 40
YEAR S, NEWTON, THANA PARASIYA, DISTRICT
HOSHANGABAD (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(SHRI S.K. GANGRADE AND MS. CHOTI KUSHRAM - ADVOCATES )
AND
THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH P.S. SOHAGPUR
DISTRICT HOSHANGABAD
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI VIJAY PANDEY - PANEL LAWYER FOR THE STATE )
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374 of
Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
29.10.2003 passed by Addl. Sessons Judge, Sohagpur, District Hoshangabad
in S.T. No.49/2001, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section
4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of
Rs. 3,000/- (each) with default stipulations.
2. The counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants do not want
to press their conviction recorded by the trial Court, however, it is submitted
that the ends of justice would be met, if the jail sentence of the appellants is
reduced to the period already undergone.
3. The counsel for the State has supported the conviction and sentence
recorded by the trial Court.
4. Having heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and
on perusal of the impugned judgment and other material on record, since
counsel for the appellants has not pressed upon the conviction of the
appellants, therefore, the conviction of the appellants under Section 4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is hereby affirmed.
5. So far as sentence is concerned, the incident took place 23 years ago,
in the considered view of this Court, no fruitful purpose will be served by again
sending the appellants to the jail after about 23 years of the incident, therefore, it
would be in the interest of justice if the jail sentence of the appellants are
reduced to the period already undergone and fine amount is enhanced.
6. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the
appellants recorded by the trial Court under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition
Act, 1961 is hereby affirmed. The jail sentence of the appellants is reduced to
the period already undergone and the fine amount under Section 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act, 1961 is enhanced from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.5,000/- each.
7. The appellants are directed to deposit the remaining fine amount
before the trial Court concerned within 45 days from today. The appellants are
on bail, their bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged subject to deposit
of aforesaid fine amount.
8. Record of the trial Court be sent back immediately along with a copy
of this judgment for information and necessary action.
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
pb
