Ram Kumar and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court allowed appeal of in-laws (Appellants 2-7) in husband-wife double murder case, acquitting them as evidence lacked specific dowry cruelty allegations against them. Court dismissed husband's appeal and affirmed his conviction under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Court applied presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act.
What did the court decide?
Appeals of Appellants Nos. 2 to 7 allowed; they acquitted and convicted persons set aside. Appeal of Ram Kumar dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
What the court decided
1 / 18
2024:CGHC:44867
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 677 of 2006
Judgment reserved on 03/09/2024
Judgment passed on 18/11/2024
- Ram Kumar, aged about 23 years, S/o. Punitram.
- Tukaram, aged about 34 years, S/o. Punitram,
- Sukaloo, aged about 32 years, S/o. Punitram,
- Punitram, aged about 70 years, S/o. Pooran Sahu,
- Smt. Basan Bai, aged about 65 years, W/o Punitram,
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the evidence sufficiently established that appellants Nos. 2 to 7 subjected the deceased to cruelty for dowry soon before her death to attract Section 113-B of the Evidence Act.
Whether the appellants Nos. 2 to 7 are liable for conviction under Sections 304-B and 498-A of IPC given the lack of specific allegations against them.
Whether the appeal by the husband (Appellant No. 1) for acquittal should be dismissed under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ram Kumar
- appellant
Tukaram
- appellant
Sukaloo
- appellant
Punitram
- appellant
Basan Bai
- appellant
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRA/677/2006
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court