SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- Prafulla C. Pant and D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ.

Criminal Appeal No. 533 of 2016 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 3598 of 2014). D/d. 23.5.2016.

Ghan Shyam Singh - Appellant

Versus

State of U.P. - Respondent

For the Appellants :- Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Ms. Shumaila Altaf and Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocates.

For the Respondents :- Vibhu Tiwari and Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Advocates.

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 306 Reduction of sentence - Accused had no issue for 20 years from his wife - He got remarried - His first wife committed suicide - Accused convicted and sentenced to 10 years R.I. under Section 306 I.P.C. and sentenced to 7 years - Sentenced reduced to already undergone(2 years).

[Paras 9 and 10]

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.12.2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No. 5666 of 2003 whereby the High Court has dismissed the appeal.

4. The appellant was convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and directed to pay a fine of L 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with default stipulation by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Court No.11), Mathura, in Session Trial Case No. 700 of 1998.

5. Brief facts of the case are that - on 26.02.1997, PW-1 Phool Singh (Complainant) submitted a written report at Police Station, Kotwali, Mathura, stating that his daughter Usha Devi who got married to appellant viz. Ghan Shyam Singh on 04.03.1977 has committed suicide, after the appellant got re-married to co-accused viz. Veena. On said report, Crime No. 87/1997 was registered by the police and after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant and co-accused viz. Veena in respect of offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506, 306 of the I.P.C. and under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.

6. After recording the prosecution evidence, the trial court recorded the statement of the accused under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Trial Court acquitted co-accused Viz. Veena. However, it convicted the appellant under Section 306 of the I.P.C. and sentenced him as mentioned above.

7. The High Court has confirmed the conviction and sentence as recorded by the trial court.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant has confined his arguments on the point of sentence only as the notice was issued only on the quantum of sentence. It is pointed out that the couple i.e. Ghan Shyam Singh and Usha Devi who got married in the year 1977 had no issue out of the wedlock for twenty years.

9. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the appellant has served more than two years in jail. It is prayed that the period of sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State submitted that the appeal deserves to be dismissed as the appellant has served less than three years imprisonment.

10. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials on record, in the facts and circumstances of the case, while declining to interfere with the conviction of the appellant, we modify and reduce the sentence awarded against the appellant to the period already undergone by him. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of and the appellant is directed to be released forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.

.