Appeal against acquittal of in-laws in dowry death case. High Court found trial court's finding proper based on accused age and lack of electricity, upholding acquittal.
Leave to appeal refused; application dismissed; memorandum of appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Chief Justice’s Court Daily Cause List Serial No. 31
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
(Lucknow)
U/s 378 Cr.P.C. No. 1691 of 2002
State of Uttar Pradesh ...Applicant/appellant
Through : Mrs. Smiti Sahay, Additional Government Advocate v/s
Gulam Husain and another ....Opposite parties
CORAM : HON'BLE RAJESH BINDAL,CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, JUDGE
ORDER
NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, J.
2 U/s 378 Cr.P.C. No. 1691 of 2002
Akhtar in 1996 as per Muslim rites and rituals. Accused persons Akhtar (husband of the deceased), Gulam Husain (father-in-law) and Smt. Sartuna (mother-in-law) of the deceased were demanding colour T.V. as additional dowry, whereas the informant was not in a position to fulfill the said demand. Therefore, the accused persons started torturing Anisha and ultimately they burnt her on 13.12.1999. Due to the burn injuries, daughter of the informant died on 13.12.1999. On getting the information from one Bakridi when she reached at the matrimonial home of Anisha, she found her dead body was lying in burnt condition. The informant had sent her another son-in-law Lal Mohammad to lodge the F.I.R. in the police station concerned but no F.I.R. was registered. After that, by the order of higher police authorities, an F.I.R. of the occurrence was lodged on March 11, 2000 at 9.30 A.M. vide Crime No.52/2000, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the family members of in-laws of deceased. By the order of the court the dead body of deceased was exhumed from the grave and postmortem examination was conducted.
3 U/s 378 Cr.P.C. No. 1691 of 2002
were examined as prosecution witnesses. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of accused persons was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which they denied the charges and submitted that all of sudden fire broke out accidentally and deceased engulfed in fire and received burn injuries. They neither tortured the deceased, nor demanded any dowry.
4 U/s 378 Cr.P.C. No. 1691 of 2002
accused Gulam Husain was about 70 years and age of his wife was approximately 60 years. They were aged and physically weak persons. Hence, the story of torture by accused persons Gulam Husain and Sartuna is not probable. The trial court has also found that exit of the house of accused persons Gulam Husain and Sartuna is separate from their son. They were residing separately from their son and daughter-inlaw. Since the deceased had received burn injuries all over the body, therefore, the burden of proof regarding the cause of burn injuries was on Akhtar, who is the husband of the deceased as she was residing with him at the time of death.
5 U/s 378 Cr.P.C. No. 1691 of 2002
the trial court, we are of the considered view that the view taken by the trial court was a probable and logical view, which is based on valid reasons. The judgment of the trial court cannot be said to be illegal, illogical and improbable. So, we are satisfied that there is absolutely no hope of success in this appeal and accordingly, no interference is called for.
(Narendra Kumar Johari, J.) (Rajesh Bindal, C.J.)
Lucknow December 9, 2021 ML/Kuldeep
Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No
Digitally signed by MUNNA LAL Date: 2022.02.24 14:57:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's acquittal of father-in-law and mother-in-law in a dowry death case.
Whether there is perversity in the trial court's finding based on the age of accused and lack of electricity connection.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
State of Uttar Pradesh
Narendra Kumar Johari
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
