LAWS(DLH)-2013-8-238

PARVEZ Vs. STATE

Decided On August 01, 2013
PARVEZ Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parvez (the appellant) impugns judgment dated 06.10.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 74/2008 arising out of FIR No. 248/2006 PS Gokalpuri by which he was convicted under Sections 498A/304B IPC. By an order dated 13.10.2010 he was sentenced to undergo RI for ten years under Section 304B IPC and RI for three years with fine Rs. 20,000/- under Section 498A IPC.

(2.) Allegations against the appellant were that he was married to Smt.Anisa on 20.11.2005. On 03.04.2006 Anisa committed suicide at the matrimonial house No.114, New MUstafabad, Eidgah Gate. Daily Diary (DD) No. 18A was assigned to SI Imadul Islam who with Const.Virender went to the spot. SDM was informed. The body was sent to mortuary, GTB Hospital. On 07.04.2006, Abida Begum (victim's mother) got her statement recorded and the First Information Report was lodged. Parvez, Nawab, Nazma and Chand Bibi were suspected for committing the offence. Abida Begum leveled allegations against them for harassment to her daughter- Anisa on account of dowry demand. During the course of investigation, statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The accused persons were arrested. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against all of them. They were duly charged and brought to trial. The prosecution examined eleven witnesses. In their 313 statements, the accused persons pleaded false implication. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment, held only Parvez guilty for the offence mentioned previously and sentenced him accordingly. Three others - Nawab, Nazma and Chand Bibi were acquitted of the charges. It is significant to note that the State did not prefer any appeal against their acquittal. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the appeal.

(3.) During the course of hearing, appellant's counsel on instructions stated at Bar that the appellant Parvez has opted not to challenge his conviction under Sections 498A/304B IPC and accepts it voluntarily. He however, prayed to take lenient view as he has already undergone the substantial period of substantive sentence awarded to him and he is not a previous convict.