The Allahabad High Court has observed that Section 304-B IPC, a provision punishing the Dowry Death offence, does not prescribe any fine in addition to the sentence and hence, the same can not be imposed on a convict.

A bench of Justice Zafeer Ahmad made the observation as it flagged a “glaring error” in the decision of a trial court to impose a fine of Rs. 20K on an accused convicted under the provision.

The bench was considering a bail application filed by Laxmi Narayan, who has been convicted in a dowry death case in connection with a 2000 case from Lucknow.

Case in brief

Narayan was convicted under Sections 498A and 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. For the offence under Section 304-B IPC, the trial court sentenced him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹20,000.

It also imposed 3 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹6,000 under Section 498A IPC and one year's rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹2,000 under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He moved the High Court challenging his conviction in 2025.

High Court's observations

While dealing with the bail application filed in the pending appeal, the High Court specifically expressed surprise over the fine imposed by the Trial Court under Section 304-B IPC.

"I am surprised to see that the learned trial judge has imposed fine also on the accused persons under Section 304B IPC", the Court said.

The bench further clarified that the legislature has not prescribed the imposition of any fine for an offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC.

"The Court can award only such sentence as is prescribed by the statute and where the statute does not provide for imposition of a fine for a particular offence, the Court cannot impose a fine in addition to the sentence prescribed therein", the bench remarked.

The High Court expressed concern that the error had been committed by a Judicial Officer of the rank of Additional District and Sessions Judge.

"It is unfortunate that such a glaring error has been committed by the Judicial Officer of the rank of Additional District and Sessions Judge", it said.

The Court added that the sentence had been passed "without duly considering the provisions of Section 304-B IPC".

The Senior Registrar was accordingly directed to send a copy of the High Court's order to the concerned trial judge through the District Judge, "for his future guidance".

On the merits of the bail application, the Court noted that the appellant had been on bail during the trial and had not misused that liberty and hence, he was directed to be released on bail.

The bench directed the accused to deposit the ₹8,000 fine imposed under Sections 498A IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act within four weeks from the date of his release, while the fine imposed under Section 304-B IPC would remain stayed.

The appellant was also directed to cooperate in the early disposal of the appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournments and not to indulge in any criminal activity after his release.

Case title - Laxmi Narayan vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 648

Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 648

Click here To Read/Download Order