LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/charan-singh-charanjit-singh-vs-the-state-of-uttarakhand-20230420/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Charan Singh @ Charanjit Singh vs The State of Uttarakhand

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
20 April 2023
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 447 of 2012
Result
Allowed
Bench
Abhay S. Oka, Rajesh Bindal
Citation
[2023] 3 S.C.R. 511 : 2023 INSC 404
Supreme Court Reports [2023] 3 S.C.R. 511 : 2023 INSC 404
Headnote

Penal Code, 1860 : ss. 304 B, 498 A and 201 – Dowry Death – Presumption as to dowry death – Prosecution case that woman married two years ago, killed by her husband-appellant and inlaws for dowry – Death was unnatural and the victim was cremated without even informing her parents – Trial court convicted the appellant, brother-in-law and mother-in-law u/ss. 304 B, 498 A and

201 and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years u/s 304B, rigorous imprisonment for two years respectively u/ss. 498A and 201 – In appeal, the conviction and sentence of the brother-in-law and mother-in-law set aside whereas the conviction of the appellant upheld, however, the sentence u/s. 304B reduced to seven years – On appeal, held: In the evidence led by the prosecution, none of the witnesses stated about the cruelty or harassment to the victim by the appellant or any of his family members on account of demand of dowry soon before the death or otherwise – Rather harassment not been narrated by anyone – Only certain oral averments regarding demand of motorcycle and land which was also much prior to the incident – Evidence led by the prosecution did not fulfil the pre-requisites to invoke presumption u/s. 304B or s.113B of the Evidence Act – Even the ingredients of s. 498A not made out – Mere death of the victim being unnatural in the matrimonial home within seven years of marriage not sufficient to convict the accused u/ss. 304B and 498A – Cause of death as such not known – Thus, the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/ss. 304B, 498A and 201 not justified – Impugned judgment of the High Court set aside – Evidence Act – s. 113 B.

Baijnath v. State of M.P (2017) 1 SCC 101 : [2016] 11 SCR 764 – referred to.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAJESH BINDAL, J. 1. The appellant, who was husband of the deceased, has filed the present appeal challenging his conviction and sentence under sections 304B, 498A and 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’). The Trial Court had sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304B, 2 years under Section 498A and 2 years under Section 201 IPC. However, the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital had reduced the sentence of the appellant under Section 304B IPC from ten years to seven years. 2. The appellant
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →