LAKHMAN SINGH R P NAUTIYAL, ,MAHAVIR KOHLI,GARIMA THAPA,pavan kumar nath vs STATE OF UTTARANCHAL — CRLA/54/2005
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) Section 304B IPC,3/7 DP ACT. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: UKHC010006062005
Next Hearing
04th April 2014
Filing Number
CRLA/1003538/2005
Filing Date
06-04-2005
Registration No
CRLA/54/2005
Registration Date
06-04-2005
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
APPEAL ( 3 )
Sub-Category
R.I. UPTO 10 YEARS & FINE ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
LAKHMAN SINGH R P NAUTIYAL, ,MAHAVIR KOHLI,GARIMA THAPA,pavan kumar nath
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
FOR FINAL HEARING -40
OLD MATTERS -253
OLD MATTERS -253
FOR FINAL HEARING -40
FOR FINAL HEARING -40
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | FOR FINAL HEARING -40 |
| 05-11-2024 | OLD MATTERS -253 |
| 30-08-2024 | OLD MATTERS -253 |
| 29-07-2024 | FOR FINAL HEARING -40 |
| 22-04-2024 | FOR FINAL HEARING -40 |
Orders
The High Court of Uttarakhand set aside the Sessions Court conviction of Lakhman Singh under Section 304-B IPC (dowry death) and Section 3/7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, acquitting him completely. The court found the prosecution failed to establish essential ingredients beyond reasonable doubt: witness testimony was vague and lacked specific dates/instances of dowry demand, the "soon before death" requirement was not proven with proximate link to death, material inconsistencies existed in witness statements, no independent corroboration was provided, and the medical evidence didn't definitively rule out suicide, thereby warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Uttarakhand set aside the Sessions Court conviction of Lakhman Singh under Section 304-B IPC (dowry death) and Section 3/7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, acquitting him completely. The court found the prosecution failed to establish essential ingredients beyond reasonable doubt: witness testimony was vague and lacked specific dates/instances of dowry demand, the "soon before death" requirement was not proven with proximate link to death, material inconsistencies existed in witness statements, no independent corroboration was provided, and the medical evidence didn't definitively rule out suicide, thereby warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts