U'khand HC acquits man convicted by lower court in 1993 dowry death case
Nainital, The Uttarakhand High Court has acquitted a man who was convicted by a lower court 32 years old dowry death case.
In a judgement passed on Friday, the single bench of Justice Pankaj Purohit of the High Court absolved Ram Kumar Gupta of the charges levelled against him under the Dowry Prohibition Act citing serious illegalities and irregularities in his conviction by the trial court.
The trial court convicted the accused in the dowry death case of his wife on the basis of hearsay and photostat copies of alleged letters written by her, treating them as valid evidence, the court said.
Photocopies in the absence of originals have no legal validity, it said.
Gupta, a resident of Chamoli district, was booked under the dowry prohibition act after his wife's death in 1993.
In 2007, his trial was concluded and he was convicted by the Chamoli District Court for the dowry death of his wife. Gupta had been sentenced by the trial court to two and a half years of imprisonment in the case.
He challenged the lower court's verdict in the high court claiming that he had good relationship with his wife and had made no dowry demands. His brother also confirmed this in his testimony.
Gupta had informed his wife's family about her accidental death. She had succumbed to injuries after getting burnt accidentally while cooking. Her last rites were performed with her family's consent, Gupta said in his petition.
However, later her family levelled dowry harassment charges against him, even though the investigating officer confirmed that the case had been received after a delay of one and a half years.
It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that a delayed FIR in the case made the harassment complaint seem suspicious.
Further the deceased had made a dying declaration to the SDM, stating that she had burnt herself while cooking and her husband was not to blame for it.
After the hearing, the High Court set aside the Chamoli court's decision and acquitted Gupta of all charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Lucknow surgeon booked for giving a ‘local look' to 2 Uzbek women
LUCKNOW: A Lucknow-based private plastic surgeon and his friend have been booked by the police for allegedly facilitating the illegal stay and cosmetic surgeries of two women from Uzbekistan in the state capital. The FIR invokes sections of the BNS, specifically 318(4) for cheating and 61 for criminal conspiracy, along with Section 5 of the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939, and Sections 14(A) and 7(1) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, pertaining to the illegal stay of foreign nationals and violation of the relevant act. (Pic for representation) According to Lucknow police officials, the surgeon, despite knowing about the women's unauthorised entry into the country, conducted surgeries to alter their appearance to resemble local individuals and provided them with accommodation in the city through his friend. Police registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Dr Vivek Gupta, who operates Minerva Clinic, and Trijinraj alias Arjun Rana at the Sushant Golf City police station on Friday. The charges include allegedly aiding the illegal stay of the Uzbekistan women and assisting them in undergoing plastic surgeries without verifying their identities or immigration status. Dr Gupta has two clinics located near Patrakarpuram, Gomti Nagar, and Ahimamau. The FIR, filed by sub-inspector Mahesh Kumar Singh, invokes sections of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), specifically 318(4) for cheating and 61 for criminal conspiracy, along with Section 5 of the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939, and Sections 14(A) and 7(1) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, pertaining to the illegal stay of foreign nationals and violation of the relevant act. According to the complainant, the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) conducted a raid on Flat No. 527 in New Hazratganj on June 20, 2025, based on confidential intelligence. The FIR states that the flat was allegedly rented out for commercial purposes without informing the local police, FRRO, or administrative authorities. During the raid, officials found two Uzbekistan nationals, identified as Holida and Nilofar, who had been residing there since June 18. The women allegedly failed to produce valid passports or visas and did not cooperate with the inquiry, as per the FIR. During interrogation, the women claimed to have lost their travel documents approximately two years prior, after arriving in India, and had requested acquaintances, including Lola Kayumova and Trijinraj, to report the loss. However, they could not confirm if a formal complaint was ever filed. They further stated that Lola, who has been residing in India for an extended period, introduced them to Dr. Vivek Gupta for plastic surgery procedures. The FIR alleges that these surgeries were performed without verifying their identity or legal status. The women also stated that Dr. Gupta and Rana were responsible for arranging their accommodation in New Hazratganj. Trijinraj reportedly resides in Flat No. 104 of Omaxe R1, while Dr. Gupta stays in Flat No. 1103 of the same building. Both women have been placed under surveillance by the FRRO as the investigation progresses. Authorities are now investigating a potential larger network involved in facilitating illegal immigration, identity manipulation and document forgery.
The Hindu
11 hours ago
- The Hindu
Police can't barge into houses of history-sheeters under guise of surveillance: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that the police have no right to knock on the doors of suspected persons or history-sheeters or 'barge' into their houses at night under the guise of surveillance. The ruling by Justice V.G. Arun came on a plea by a man accused of threatening police officers from discharging their duties when they asked him to come out of his house late at night as part of night check on rowdy history sheeters. Allowing the plea, the court quashed the FIR against the man and all further proceedings in connection with it, saying that 'under the guise of surveillance, the police cannot knock on the doors or barge into the houses of history sheeters'. The court said that police officers should understand that the concept of home 'transcends its physical manifestation as a dwelling and encompasses a rich tapestry of existential, emotional and social dimensions'. 'In other words, every man's house is his castle or temple, the sanctity of which cannot be vilified by knocking on the door at odd hours. A person's right to life encompasses the right to live with dignity and dignity is non-negotiable,' it said. The court further said that under the Kerala Police Manual only 'informal watching' of history sheeters and 'close watch' over those leading criminal existence were permitted. 'Undoubtedly, neither of those expressions permit domicile visits at night,' it added. It also pointed out that under section 39 of the Kerala Police Act all persons are bound to comply with the 'lawful directions' of a police officer for discharge of his functions. 'Knocking on the doors of a history sheeter at midnight and demanding him to come out of the house cannot by any stretch of imagination be termed as a lawful direction,' the court said. Consequently, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence of threatening a police officer to obstruct him from discharging his duties under the Kerala Police Act for refusing to abide by the direction to come out of the house at night, the court added. 'If, as alleged, the petitioner had used derogatory language or threatened the police during the course of such refusal, his action may invite some other offence, but definitely not the offence he is presently charged with,' it said. The petitioner had claimed that he was implicated in the case to divert the enquiry ordered by the High Court into his complaint alleging police harassment. The police had claimed that as part of their night check duty on rowdy history sheeters, officers had gone to ascertain if the petitioner was at home. However, when he was asked to open the door of his home, he refused to do so and also abused and intimidated the officer, it had alleged.
NDTV
12 hours ago
- NDTV
Cops Can't Barge Into History Sheeters' Homes For 'Surveillance': Court
Kochi: The Kerala High Court has held that the police have no right to knock on the doors of suspected persons or history sheeters or "barge" into their homes at night under the guise of surveillance. The ruling by Justice V G Arun came on a plea by a man accused of threatening police officers from discharging their duties when they asked him to come out of his home late at night as part of night check on rowdy history sheeters. Allowing the plea, the court quashed the FIR against the man and all further proceedings in connection with it, saying that "under the guise of surveillance, the police cannot knock on the doors or barge into the houses of history sheeters". The court said that police officers should understand that the concept of home "transcends its physical manifestation as a dwelling and encompasses a rich tapestry of existential, emotional and social dimensions". "In other words, every man's house is his castle or temple, the sanctity of which cannot be vilified by knocking on the door at odd hours. A person's right to life encompasses the right to live with dignity and dignity is non-negotiable," it said. The court further said that under the Kerala Police Manual only 'informal watching' of history sheeters and 'close watch' over those leading criminal existence were permitted. "Undoubtedly, neither of those expressions permit domicile visits at night," it added. It also pointed out that under section 39 of the Kerala Police Act all persons are bound to comply with the 'lawful directions' of a police officer for discharge of his functions. "Knocking on the doors of a history sheeter at midnight and demanding him to come out of the house cannot by any stretch of imagination be termed as a lawful direction," the court said. Consequently, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence of threatening a police officer to obstruct him from discharging his duties under the Kerala Police Act for refusing to abide by the direction to come out of the house at night, the court added. "If, as alleged, the petitioner had used derogatory language or threatened the police during the course of such refusal, his action may invite some other offence, but definitely not the offence he is presently charged with," it said. The petitioner had claimed that he was implicated in the case to divert the enquiry ordered by the High Court into his complaint alleging police harassment. The police had claimed that as part of their night check duty on rowdy history sheeters, officers had gone to ascertain if the petitioner was at home. However, when he was asked to open the door of his home, he refused to do so and also abused and intimidated the officer, it had alleged.
