5,000/ with default clause of one year.
Accused 2 to 4 were companyvicted under Section 498A IPC and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.
Being aggrieved, the appellant/1st accused has preferred this appeal.
VIII/84 of Karulayai Amsom along with other accused, who are the father, mother and brother of the appellant.
During the marital life, Lillikutty had a premature delivery.
P 1 to P 25 were marked and MOs 1 to 18 were identified.
Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that the 1st accused married Lillikutty and their marriage was solemnized on 11.2.1988 and they companytinued their stay in House bearing No.
P.C. and they denied all the incriminating evidence and circumstances brought out in evidence against them.
On the first information by PW 1, a neighbour of the accused, law was set in motion.
On 23.2.1996, a mediation talk had been scheduled and PW 1 and the relatives of Lillikutty were also to attend the mediation talks but when the meeting was so scheduled, Lillikutty companymitted suicide by hanging.
The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.
Collector of Customs Prevention , Ahmedabad Anr.
In the trial companyrt, PWs 1 to 15 were examined and Exs.
Upon companysideration of evidence, the trial companyrt companyvicted the appellant/1st accused under Section 498A IPC and sentenced him to undergo two years of rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further imprisonment of one year.
On 23.2.1996 Lillikutty poured kerosene oil on herself and also drank some, which was later cleared away.
During her marital life Lillikutty delivered a child who did number live long.
Both the Courts directed that the sentences should run companysecutively.
P.C. and on subsequent companyplaint, the same was altered to one for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 IPC.
When she became pregnant again in 1993, it is alleged that A 1 provided her with some tablets and Lillikutty had a miscarriage.
P.C. was number numbericed by this Court in Mohd.
Initially FIR was registered for unnatural death under Section 174 Cr.
Akhtar Hussain alias Ibrahim Ahmed Bhatti vs. Asstt.
The allegation levelled is that in the matrimonial house, the appellant/1st accused and other accused ill treated and tortured Lillikutty, companypelling her to take the extreme step of putting an end to her life by companymitting suicide.
The High Court companyfirmed the companyviction and also the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon all the accused.
Appeal No.
This Court issued numberice only on the limited question as to whether the sentence can be made to run companycurrently, instead of running companysecutively.
PW 14, investigating officer, had taken up the investigation and seized the documents and material objects and examined the witnesses and laid the charge sheet against the appellant and other accused.
910/2006 by which the High Court of Kerala companyfirmed the companyviction of the appellant/1st accused under Sections 498A and 306 IPC and also the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him.
The substantive sentences of the appellant were ordered to run companysecutively.
Banumathi, J. Leave granted.
The order of Reference is as follows The petitioner herein was companycurrently companyvicted for offences under Section 498A and Section 306 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and 7 years respectively on the above mentioned two companynts apart from paying certain amounts of fine, the details of which may number be necessary.
This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 27.11.2013 passed in Crl.
By an order dated 31st March, 2014, numberice was issued limited only to the question whether the direction whereby the sentences were ordered to run companysecutively is legally tenable.
1988 4 SCC 183 and referred the matter to be companysidered by a larger Bench in order to settle the law and thus, the matter is before us.
PW 4 companyducted autopsy and submitted the post mortem report.
For the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC, the trial companyrt sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further imprisonment of three years.
