Crl.A. No.    of 2011 @ SLP(Crl) 8982 of 2010 1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 219  OF 2011 [ARISING OUT OF SLP(CRL.) NO. 8982 OF 2010]

RUBI DEVI & ANR. ...... APPELLANTS

VERSUS

STATE OF BIHAR ...... RESPONDENT

O R D E R             

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellants herein are the married sisters-in-

law  of  the  complainant  Punam  Devi  who  had  filed  a  

complaint under Sections 498A and 323 of the Indian Penal  

and  Section  4  of  the  Dowry  Prohibition  Act.   On  

conviction,  the  appellants  have  been  sentenced  by  the  

trial court to one year rigorous imprisonment  and a fine  

of  Rs.  2500/-  and  in  default  of  payment  of  fine  to  

undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 21 days under  

Section 498A IPC and three months rigorous imprisonment  

under Section 323 IPC  and a further sentence for two  

months  rigorous  imprisonment  and  a  fine  of  Rs.  1000/-  

under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and payment  

of fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine  

to  undergo  further  imprisonment  of  seven  days.   The

Crl.A. No.    of 2011 @ SLP(Crl) 8982 of 2010 2

sentences aforesaid were affirmed by the Appellate court.  

The High Court in revision has reduced the sentence to  

eight months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under  

Section 498A  but affirmed the conviction and sentence by  

the  courts  below  awarded  with  respect  to  the  other  

offences.

3. When this matter came up before this Court on the  

12th November, 2010, notice was issued confined to the  

quantum of sentence, returnable within four weeks keeping  

in  mind  that  the  appellants  herein  were  the  married  

sisters-in-law  of  the  complainant.   We  see  that  the  

appellants  have  undergone  about  five  months  of  the  

sentence under Section 498A. We feel that in the facts of  

the case, the sentence awarded to the appellants under  

Section 498A of the IPC should be reduced to that already  

undergone.  We make an order accordingly.

4. The appellants shall be released forthwith if not  

required in connection with any other case.

5. The appeal is dismissed with the above modification  

in the sentence.

...... ..................J [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

........................J

Crl.A. No.    of 2011 @ SLP(Crl) 8982 of 2010 3

[CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD] NEW DELHI JANUARY 18, 2011.