Manoj Kumar Tripathi vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Hon''ble Justice Shri N.K. Gupta

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 25.03.2009, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa in ST. No. 1/2008 whereby the appellant was convicted for offence punishable u/s 498-A of I.P.C. and sentenced for 3 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine three months rigorous imprisonment was directed. The prosecution case in short is that one Shrimati Rukmani wife of the applicant had sustained burn injuries on 05-11-2007 and thereafter, she died. Panchayatnama of laash was prepared and her body was sent for post mortem. Parents and relatives of the deceased made omnibus allegations against the applicant relating to harassment of the deceased on the basis of the dowry demand and it was also suspected that the appellant committed murder of the deceased. The parents of the deceased had told about the dying declaration of the deceased to that effect. After due investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rewa who committed the case to the Sessions Court, Rewa and ultimately it was transferred to the Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa (Shri Mritunjay Singh).

The appellant abjured his guilt. He took a specific plea that he was falsely implicated by his step mother. He kept his wife with comfort. There was no demand of dowry from his side. In defence, Manwati (DW-1) and Rambhadra Shastri (DW-2) were examined.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge after considering the evidence adduced by the parties, acquitted the appellant from the charges of offence punishable u/s 302 and 306 of IPC but convicted him for the offence punishable u/s 498-A of IPC and sentenced as mentioned above.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the appellant does not want to challenge the merits of the case, but he prays for reduction of the sentence. It is true that the marriage of the deceased took place with the appellant eight years prior to her death and therefore, no charges of offence punishable u/s 304-B of IPC could be framed. In eight years of marriage of a woman, her life settles and therefore, it cannot be said that she committed suicide due to cruelty done by the appellant. Therefore, the sentence cannot be based upon the death of the deceased Rukmani but, it should be dependent upon the overt act of the appellant. The appellant is the first offender who has to maintain his family. He remained in the custody for approximately 18 months. Therefore, under such circumstances, it appears that the period of jail sentence for which he remained in the custody is sufficient punishment, but fine imposed upon the appellant should be enhanced.

On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal filed by the appellant is hereby partly allowed. The conviction directed against the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 498-A of IPC is hereby maintained but, sentence is reduced to the period for which he has already undergone in the custody by enhancement of the fine amount from a sum of Rs. 1,000/- to a sum of Rs. 5,000/-. The appellant is directed to deposit the remaining fine amount before the trial court within two months from today. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo for six months rigorous imprisonment in addition.

At present, the appellant is on bail. His presence is no more required before this court and therefore, it is directed that his bail bond shall stand discharged. A copy of the judgment be sent to the trial Court along with its record for information and compliance.