Ameena Khatoon and Another vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

Ameena Khatoon and Another vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Suspension application allowed: remaining sentence of the applicants-appellants suspended, conditional upon furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti; the appeal itself remains pending and is to be listed in due course.

Issue for consideration

Whether the remaining sentence of the applicants-appellants, convicted under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, should be suspended during pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 1247 of 2025.

Court's answer

The Court found that the convicts stood trial and never misused the concession of bail, had already undergone approximately one year of the total seven-year sentence, and that the appeal was not likely to mature for final hearing in the near future; therefore further detention would not serve any useful purpose and, if the sentence were not suspended, the appeal might be rendered infructuous.

Ratio / Principle

The remaining sentence of the applicants-appellants was suspended, subject to their furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti.

Key takeaways

In suspending the sentence, the Court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the appeal.obiter¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj, J.), Order dated 6.8.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 1247 of 2025 (Ameena Khatoon and another v. State of U.P.) — Order on Suspension of Sentence Application ALLOWED. Applicants-appellants Ameena Khatoon and Waheed Ali (parents of the husband), convicted on 18.01.2025 by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Basti in Sessions Trial Case No. 54 of 2023 (Case Crime No. 311 of 2022, P.S. Nagar, Distt. Basti) under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act — seven years under Section 304B I.P.C., three years plus fine of Rs. 10,000/- under section 498A I.P.C., and two years plus fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, with default imprisonment of two months each — obtained suspension of their remaining sentence. Grounds: the convicts stood trial and never misused the concession of bail; they had already undergone approximately one year in custody out of the total seven-year sentence; and the appeal was not likely to mature for final hearing in the near future, further detention serving no useful purpose and risking rendering the appeal infructuous. Suspension conditioned on furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti. Expressly without any expression of opinion on the merits of the appeal; appeal to be listed in due course.

Court No. - 81

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1247 of 2025

Appellant :- Ameena Khatoon And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Pramod Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

(Order on Appeal)

List this appeal in due course.

(Order on Suspension of Sentence Application)

Applicants-Appellants, namely, Ameena Khatoon and Waheed Ali have applied for suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal, arising against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.01.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Basti in Sessions Trial Case No. 54 of 2023, thereby convicting the appellants under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, followed by imposition of sentence of seven years, under Section 304B I.P.C., three years, under section 498A I.P.C. with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and two years, under Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act with fine of Rs.5,000/-, with a further condition that in the event of non deposit of fine, convicts shall undergo further imprisonment of two months and two months, respectively.

The applicants-convicts were prosecuted through Case Crime No. 311 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act I.P.C., registered at Police Station Nagar, District Basti.

Learned counsel for applicants has argued that the complainant's daughter died unnatural death within four months after her marriage and alleging it to be a case of dowry death, applicant no.1 along with her husband and son was implicated who stand convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304B I.P.C. etc. According to him, the husband of the deceased has been awarded the sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment, whereas his parents (applicants) have been sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and against that a period of approximately an year has already been undergone by them in custody. Learned counsel

has referred to the deposition of the complainant, P.W.1 and pointed out that this material witness has attributed the demand of dowry to the son of the applicant, besides admitting that his daughter had a damaged liver to the extent of 60% and she was under treatment. He prays for suspension of sentence.

The prayer is opposed by learned State Counsel who has argued that the prosecution has proved the charges by adducing convincing evidence and the post-mortem of the victim reflects in all ten injuries suffered by the deceased, however, during the course of hearing, it is not disputed by learned State Counsel that cause of death described by P.W.9, Dr. Manoj Kumar is asphyxia due to hanging. It is further stated by learned State Counsel that Ex. 64 ख/1 and 64 ख/2 are the medical prescriptions of Dr. Tanvir Ahmad Khan and Dr. Aamra Khatoon showing the victim to be a liver patient.

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering their submissions, this Court finds that convicts stood trial and never misused the concession of bail. That apart, after the judgment of conviction dated 18.01.2025, applicants have been sent in custody to serve the sentence, but in the considered opinion of this Court, the appeal is not likely to get mature for final hearing in near future. Applicants have already undergone a period of approximately one year in custody, out of total awarded sentence of seven years. Therefore, further detention of the applicants behind the bars would not serve any useful purpose, and in case, the sentence is not suspended, the appeal may be rendered infructuous.

Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the appeal, the remaining sentence of the applicantsappellants is suspended, subject to their furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti.

The application is allowed.

Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Shiv

Digitally signed by :- SHIV KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad