• About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us
Tuesday, January 19, 2021
Law Trend
  • google-play
  • apple-store
  • Login
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
No Result
View All Result

Allahabad HC Reduces Sentence in Dowry Death Case; Says Its Not Rarest of Rare Case

Law Trend by Law Trend
October 2, 2020
in Court Updates, Trending Stories
4 min read
272 21
0
allahabad high court
569
SHARES
1.6k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare via WhatsappShare via EmailPinterest

In the latest Judgment of Allahabad High Court, a Division Bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Rajbir Singh reduced the sentence of the appellant-accused to the period already served as the case did not fall in the category of rarest of the rare.

Brief Facts of the Case Ram Ajor Vs State of U.P.  are as follows:-

The accused-appellant Ram Ajor was married to the victim. The victim and the accused got married six years before the incident. At the time of marriage, the father of the victim gave utensils, clothes and watch etc. as dowry to the accused. However, the accused used to harass and beat the victim and used to demand additional dowry. The father of the victim gave a buffalo and rupees two thousand as additional dowry, but the harassment and beatings of his daughter never ceased.

It was alleged that on 21.06.2004, the victim was found hanging dead from a tree. A complaint was filed in the police station. The husband( accused) informed the police that the victim had gone to the jungle to collect grass and had committed suicide.

On 23.06.2004 a case was registered against the accused and co-accused Kismati Devi. After going through all the evidence in the case and testimony of the witnesses, the Court convicted the appellant-accused under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and section of 4 of DP Act and was sentenced to life imprisonment. The co-accused Kismati Devi was acquitted in the case.

The accused-appellant challenged this order before the Allahabad High Court.

Proceedings before the Allahabad High Court

During the appeal, the counsel for the appellant did not dispute the facts of the case but only argued that the sentence of the accused was excessive and harsh.

The Court though went through the entire evidence of the case.

Various cases were referred to ascertain the procedure, and the Court concurred that there were four ingredients of offences under Section 304-B

  • The nature of injuries should be such that would not have occurred under normal circumstances.
  • The death must have occurred within seven years of marriage.
  • Harassment or cruelly must have occurred “soon before the marriage.”
  • Cruelty or harassment must be connected to the demand for dowry.

The Court observed that in the present case, all the ingredients were there. The victim died by way of hanging, it was undisputed that the death occurred within seven years of marriage, harassment and beating were routine occurrences, and as evidenced by the brother of the victim, the victim was beaten one week before her death. The father and brother had deposed before the Court that demand of dowry had started soon after the marriage.

The Court opined that given all the facts and circumstances of the case, the conviction was correct.

On the issue of sentence, the Court referred to G.V. Siddaramesh Vs. State of Karnataka, 2010 and Kashmira Devi Versus State of Uttarakhand & Ors. In the above-mentioned cases, the facts were similar to the instant case, and the Court had reduced the sentence of the accused.

The Court took note of the fact that the accused had already spent more than 16 years in prison and the instant case did not fall in the category of rarest of the rare and does not require that maximum sentence should be awarded to the accused.

The Court reduced the sentence of the accused-appellant to the period he had already served and directed the authorities to release him from prison.

Case Details:-

Title: Ram Ajor Vs State of U.P. 

Case No. : Criminal Appeal No. 5050 of 2006

Date of Order:29.09.2020

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Rajbir Singh

Read Judgment
Tags: Allahabad High Courtcriminal appealdowry deathhigh court orderslatestrend2

Related Posts

files
Court Updates

Appoint more Judges For 3.5 Crore cases pending in Subordinate Courts: PIL in Supreme Court

January 19, 2021
Yogi Adityanath
Court Updates

Accused Calling “UP CM Thick Skinned” Granted Bail by Allahabad HC

January 19, 2021
Supreme Court New Image (4)
Trending Stories

Who is liable to pay gratuity to teachers of Govt Aided Colleges?

January 19, 2021
Supreme Court New 9
Judgements

Prescription Of Higher Educational Qualification For Promotion is not Arbitrary: Supreme Court

January 19, 2021
punjab-haryana-high-court
Trending Stories

Anticipatory Bail For Murder of Person Alive Rejected; HC Directs Session Judge to Study and Write Synopsis of SC Judgments

January 19, 2021
right to marry and religion conversion
Trending Stories

Lucknow based Women’s right group moves Allahabad High Court against New Anti Conversion law

January 19, 2021

POPULAR NEWS

  • advocate sticker fortuner

    Where is the Provision of Using Advocate Sticker on Vehicle?

    5013 shares
    Share 2005 Tweet 1253
  • What is the tenure of protection granted under Anticipatory Bail? :SC 5 Judges

    4801 shares
    Share 1920 Tweet 1200
  • Air Asia Crashes Against Gaurav Taneja; Court Says Airline Suppressed Facts

    4627 shares
    Share 1851 Tweet 1157
  • Husband-Wife Take Oath as High Court Judge

    3244 shares
    Share 1298 Tweet 811
  • Is Using Stickers of ‘‘Advocate’’ on Vehicle legally Allowed?

    3166 shares
    Share 1266 Tweet 792
Law Trend

Rabhyaa Foundation has started this platform on values enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. The object of this platform is to create informed citizens with recent legal updates, Judgments, Legislations of Parliament and State Legislatures, and views of experts in the field of law, in plain and pointed language, for the intellectual development of citizens.
Our tag line “The Line of Law” guides that this......
Read More

Follow Us On Social Media

Subscribe to our News Letter

Sign Up for weekly newsletter to get the latest news, Updates and amazing offers delivered directly in to your inbox.

Categories

  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Columns
  • Bare Acts and Rules
  • Online Internship
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend – हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
      • Uttar Pradesh Acts
      • Uttar Pradesh Rules
      • Uttrakhand
      • DELHI
  • Webinar/Videos
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
  • Android App
  • IOS APP

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In