Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASWANI @ SONU versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Aswani @ Sonu v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4092 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 13595 (18 August 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Reserved.

Court No. 41

Criminal Appeal No. 4092 of 2006

Aswani @ Sonu Vs. State of U.P. and another.

Connected with

Criminal Appeal No.  217 of 2006

Vijay Prakash Rana and others Vs. State of U.P.

Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

The appellant Aswani @ Sonu has preferred criminal appeal No. 4092 of 2006 and the appellants Vijay Prakash Rana, Smt. Jaimala, Neeraj have preferred criminal appeal no. 217 of 2006 against the judgement and order dated 13.1.2006 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, Ghaziabad in S.T. No. 611 of 2003 whereby the appellants have been found guilty and convicted under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D. P. Act and have been sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment up to seven years and fine has also been imposed on them. They have prayed for release on bail during pendency of their appeals.

Heard Sri V. P. Srivastava, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Nitin Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Ram Sheel Sharma, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

The  thumbnail description of the preceding incidents are that one Savita @ Sangita was married with appellant Aswani @ sonu on 7.2.2002 and dowry was given but it could not satisfy the accused and further demand of dowry was made. The Informant had given Rs. 20,000/- to the appellant Aswani @ Sonu about two months prior to the incident as he wanted to open a shop. According to prosecution case, Anil had come to give invitation card to the accused persons on 23.1.2003 and at that time he saw the accused persons beating Smt. Savita @ Sangita and when he intervened a demand of Rs. One lakh was made by the accused persons. He informed the complainant and his family members. In the morning, they came to know that Smt. Savita was killed by the accused persons.

The post-mortem report shows that the deceased had contusion under the right eye, abraded contusion around the neck in an area of 21 cm X 16 cm, contusion in an area of 40 cm X 12 Cm on the upper part of the chest and the right shoulder and also 28 cm X 17 cm on the back of the chest and right hand and contusion 6 cm X 2 cm on left cheek. The post-mortem report also shows that all the cervical vertebra and spinal cord were severely crushed. The Larynx, Trachea and Bronchi were crushed. The neck was in the   shape of tube but it was not separated.

The defense version is that no demand for dowry was ever made and that the injuries were caused as a result of train accident. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the appellants have been falsely implicated in this case and have been convicted without their being any legal evidence against them. He has also contended that no demand for dowry was ever made and that the prosecution has not been able to establish the  demand of Rs. One lakh allegedly made one day prior to the incident as this fact has not been mentioned in the First Information Report also (hereinafter in short referred as F.I.R.). he has further contended that the  deceased received injuries as a result of train accident and the dead body was found near the Railway Track and at the instance of Police was shifted to the house of the accused persons.

But the learned counsel for the informant has contended that the accused had been demanding additional dowry after the marriage and the informant had also paid Rs. 20,000/- to the appellant Aswani about two months prior to the incident. He has also contended that demand of Rs. One lakh was made one day prior to the incident when Anil had gone to deliver the invitation card. He has also contended that although this fact has not been mentioned in the F.I.R. but prosecution has examined Anil who has stated this fact on oath.

Learned counsel for the informant has further contended that the injuries as received by the deceased could not have been caused on account of train accident. A suggestion was given to the medical officer during his examination that if thick cloth is wrapped around the neck, and the wheel of the train passes over the neck, these injuries could be caused. But according to the Dr. Mishra, P.W.-9 in that situation the injury must be through and through i.e. the neck should have been severed from the body. Moreover there were contused abrasion around the neck and also contusion on the front side and back side of chest and right arm and these injuries could not have been caused if the deceased was hit by the running train as in that situation the injuries must have been more severe including fractures of the other parts of the body. If a person hits against a running train the neck is not likely to come in contact of the train and to be injured as has happened in the instant case.

Learned counsel for the informant has also contended that no information was given at the G.R.P. Railway Station or to the Railway authorities about the presence of the dead body near the Railway Track.

Learned counsel for the appellants has also contended that the deceased had written a letter to her father wherein she had mentioned that she was fed-up with her life and if some untoward incident happens, her in-laws be not held responsible. But the learned  counsel for the informant has contended that this letter is not in the hand writing of the deceased as has been stated by the informant and that if any such letter was written by the deceased to her father, how it could be produced by the accused persons. Learned counsel for the appellant Aswani has further contended that appellant Aswani @ Sonu is in jail for more than three years.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without prejudice to the merits of the case, and the fact that demand of Rs. One lakh has not been mentioned in the F.I.R., I am of the view that the appellants except Aswani @ Sonu are entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the appeal. The appellant Aswani @ Sonu has not given probable explanation as to how the deceased received injuries  and died within a year of marriage in unnatural circumstances and if the dead body was found near the railway track he should have informed the concerned authorities, hence in these circumstances his prayer for bail is liable to be rejected and is hereby rejected at this stage.

Let the appellants Vijay Prakash Rana, Smt. Jaimala, Neeraj be released on bail during pendency of this appeal on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. They shall also deposit half of the amount of fine as imposed on them and the balance amount of fine shall remain stayed during pendency of the appeal.

They shall also file an undertaking that they will not indulge in any criminal or anti social activity and if any report is found against them it shall be open for the Court below to report to this Court so that their bail  may be cancelled. If any, application for expeditious hearing of the appeal is filed by the accused Aswani @ Sonu the same be listed for hearing.

Dated: 18.8.2006

RKS/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.