SUBHASH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Kans Raj Vs. State of Punjab & others, 2000 SCC SCC (Cri) 935, a Bench of three Judges of the Honourable Apex Court by its judgment dated 24.4.2000 had confirmed the conviction of Rakesh Kumar under Sections 304B, 306 and 498A of Indian Penal Code by partly allowing the appeal of accused and sentence of Rakesh Kumar, who was husband of deceased was reduced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment along with other sentences under remaining sections of Indian Penal Code for which he was convicted and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently by the Apex Court. The appellants have also relied upon Satish Chandra & anr. Vs. State of M.P., 2014 AIR SCW 2816 and in that case also it was held that immediate cause of committing suicide was regular fights with mother-in-law on account of dowry demand, but in view of the circumstance that the deceased was not happy with her matrimonial life for other reasons as well, so ends of justice would be sub-served by reducing sentence of accused from ten years to seven years' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) On the basis of the logic and reasoning given while passing the sentence in aforesaid judgments, it has been argued in the present appeal by the appellants that Additional Sessions Judge, Sangaria in Sessions Case No.5/2007 titled as State Vs. Subhash & others, by judgment dated 28.6.2008 has wrongly convicted all the three appellants under Sections 304B and 498A of Indian Penal Code. It has further been submitted by the appellants that all the three appellants have been sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of INR 1000.00 each with one month's additional imprisonment in default of payment on the count of Sec. 304B of Indian Penal Code and they have been sentenced to three years' simple imprisonment with a fine of INR 1,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, one month's additional simple imprisonment on the count of charge under Sec. 498A of Indian Penal Code. The appellants have challenged the veracity of the said judgment dated 28.6.2008 in this appeal and it has been argued on behalf of the accused-appellants that all the three appellants should be acquitted from all the charges and alternatively, it has been argued that if, any case at all, is made out against the accused-appellants, then they may be released on undergone sentence.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the accused-appellants that accused-appellant Subhash is continuously in jail in this case since the date of his arrest,viz., 12.11.2006. The period of custody suffered by other two accused-appellants is as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_153_LAWS(RAJ)10_2014.html</FRM>