Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ram Shanker Dubey vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 25 January, 2019
Bench: Arun Mishra, Navin Sinha
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 142 OF 2019
[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 8196 OF 2016]
RAM SHANKER DUBEY Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The alleged incident took place on 02.09.1996. On a complaint made by the brother of the deceased, an FIR was registered against the appellant and other accused at Police Station Maharaganj, District Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh. The charges were framed against the appellant and other accused under Sections 498A, 304B of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial court awarded a sentence to undergo life imprisonment to the appellant – Ram Shankar and other accused – Kamla Devi under Section 304B of IPC and for three years rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC and for two years rigorous imprisonment for the offence Signature Not Verified punishable under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2019.01.31 15:18:55 IST Reason: Act.
2
3. The High Court found that the prosecution has successfully proved the charges leveled against the accused and the evidence on record has rightly been appreciated and thus, affirmed the sentence awarded by the trial court.
4. The appellant – Ram Shankar is before us in appeal, by way of special leave.
5. We have heard Mr. Anis Ahmed Khan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Rohit K. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the State at length and also perused the materials on record.
6. As the appellant is the brother-in-law of the deceased and the husband of the deceased has already been acquitted, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we find it appropriate to reduce the sentence of the appellant to twelve years of imprisonment. Ordered accordingly.
7. The punishment of life imprisonment is hereby set aside and the sentence is reduced to twelve years of actual incarceration. In case the appellant has already undergone twelve years of actual incarceration, he shall be set at liberty. It is 3 made clear that in case the appellant has not completed twelve years of actual incarceration, he shall be released only on completion of the same.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the appeal is partly allowed.
.......................J. [ ARUN MISHRA ] .......................J. [ NAVIN SINHA ] New Delhi;
January 25, 2019.
4
ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.5 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) 8196 of 2016 (Arising out of impugned Judgment and final order dated 26.07.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in Criminal Appeal No. 2703 of 2008) RAM SHANKER DUBEY Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s) Date : 25-01-2019 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Appellant(s) Mr. Anis Ahmed Khan, AOR Mr. Shoaib Ahmad Khan, Adv.
Mohd. Naved Mian, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Garausa, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohit K. Singh, AOR Mr. Bharat Singh, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is partly allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (JAGDISH CHANDER) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed order is placed on the file)