Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2005) 08 SC CK 0092

Nazar vs State of Kerala and Another

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 18 August 2005 · Citation: (2006) 3 ACR 3420 : (2005) 12 SCC 476

HON’BLE JUDGES
P. P. Naolekar, J · K. G. Balakrishnan, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 1031 of 2005

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 311 words

K.G. Balakrishnan and P.P. Naolekar, JJ.—Leave granted.

2.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

3.

The Appellant was tried alongwith his mother for the offence punishable u/s 304B read with Section 34, I.P.C. The case against the Appellant was that he married deceased Soudha in 1997 and thereafter he left for Gulf. The Appellant returned from the Gulf after a period of two years and deceased Soudha and the Appellant started living together. It is the case of the prosecution that the Appellant demanded 25 cents of land to be assigned to him by the father of the deceased. As the father of the deceased was not willing to give 25 cents of land, the Appellant started harassing the deceased. He repeatedly demanded 25 cents of land and because of the incessant harassment of the Appellant the deceased had no other way but to commit suicide. On the date of the incident, it seems that there was a quarrel and the deceased soudha ran to the nearby well and jumped into it. She sustained multiple injuries and died. There was evidence of P.W. 1, P.W. 8 and P.W. 9 to prove the harassment. P.W. 8 a neighbour spoke about frequent quarrels between the Appellant and the deceased. All these satisfactorily prove that the Appellant had committed offence u/s 304B.

4.

The counsel for the Appellant prayed that the sentence imposed on the Appellant is in excess and be reduced and it was also submitted that the Appellant was not solely responsible for the death of the deceased. We find no reason to interfere with the conviction but having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence imposed on the Appellant is reduced to a period of 7 years. The Appellant is entitled to set off the period of sentence already undergone.

5.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.