Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

FACTUAL MATRIX OF RESPECTIVE APPEALS :

[5].            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1667 of 2021
 
		(Rammilan Bunkar vs. State of U.P.)           
 

(i) Appellant Rammilan Bunkar is facing incarceration since 09.02.2021 pursuant to judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Session Judge (F.T.C.), Lalitpur while deciding S.T. No.37 of 2017 (State vs. Rammilan Bunkar and 2 others), arising out of Case Crime No.113 of 2016, Police Station-Narahat, District Lalitpur. The appellant Rammilan Bunkar and 2 others were put to trial u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section ¾ D.P. Act with alternative charge u/s 302/34 I.P.C., but the learned Trial Judge have exonerated the accused-appellant from the charge u/s 304B I.P.C., but have convicted u/s 302 I.P.C. for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/-; u/s 498A I.P.C. for two years simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.3000/- and u/s 4 of D.P. Act for one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3000/- with default clause. In addition to this, remaining co-accused persons Lal Singh and Har Govind were also exonerated and acquitted from the charges u/s 498A, 304B, 302 I.P.C. & Section 4 D.P. Act.

(iii) In paragraph-7 of the judgment it is mentioned that after hearing the parties the charges against Raj Bahadur, Prem Chandra and Surajkali were framed u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act and also alternative charge u/s 302 I.P.C. However, the husband Prem Chandra too was acquitted from the charge u/s 498A I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act and he was convicted u/s 302 I.P.C. and was awarded life sentence by the learned Additional Session Judge, Court No.5, Banda. The appellant is in jail since 29.3.2017 (date of judgment).

[8]. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5071 OF 2018 (Shiv Kumar vs. State of U.P.) & CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5069 OF 2018 (Jamuna Devi and another vs. State of U.P.)

(i) The appellants Shiv Kumar, Jamuna Devi and Shankar Lal are under incarceration pursuant to impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 09.08.2018 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.3/Special Judge (DAA), Pilibhit. The appellants have filed two separate appeals challenging a common judgment and order dated 09.08.2018, whereby the learned Trial Judge has convicted the appellants in S.T. No.219 of 2017 (State of U.P. vs. Shiv Kumar and others) and S.T. No.272 of 2017 (State of U.P. vs. Shankar Lal), arising out of Case Crime No.277 of 2017, u/s 498A, 304B, I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Gajraula, District Pilibhit awarding sentence u/s 304B I.P.C. for life imprisonment; u/s 302 I.P.C. for life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.10,000/- each and u/s 498A I.P.C. for three years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.3000/- to each of the appellants. Thus it is shocking that the learned Trial Judge have recorded conviction only to accused Shankar Lal (Husband) u/s 304B as well as 302 I.P.C. both and awarded u/s 304B I.P.C. for life sentence and u/s 302 I.P.C. for life sentence and fine of Rs.10,000/-, unmindful of the fact that both the sections operates in two different spheres, having two different sets of essential ingredients.

(ii). In this case too, initially the F.I.R. was registered u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act against Shiv Kumar, Jamuna Devi and Rumla @ Urmila. Being cognizable offence the matter was committed to the court of session and the learned Trial Judge have framed the charge against the appellants u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. & 4 D.P. Act with an alternative charge u/s 302 I.P.C.

(iii). As per prosecution case, the informant's daughter Vimla (22 years) got married with Shankar Lal in April, 2016 whereby the informant has given dowry and gifts as per his capacity, but the in-laws were not satisfied and on account of scanty dowry there was a bad breath between them. The deceased's sister-in-law (nanad) Rumla @ Urmila got married with the maternal brother of Vimla and this was the sole reason for further animosity. In the intervening night of 15.6.2017 all the persons of in-laws throttled the neck of Vimla and wiped her off. Vimla was carrying the pregnancy of three months. Initially the F.I.R. was registered u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act and the charge sheet was also submitted in same sections, but after committal of the case to the court of session, the learned Trial Judge have framed the charge against the appellants u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. & 4 D.P. Act with an alternative charge u/s 302 I.P.C. on 26.10.2017, which were denied by the accused-appellants and insisted for trial.