2004(6) Supreme 376
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Punjab and Haryana High Court)
K.G. Balakrishnan and Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, JJ.
Dhain Singh & Anr. -Appellants
versus
State of Punjab -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 2004
Decided on 10-8-2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Kuldip Singh and Raj K. Pandey, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Arun K. Sinha, Rakesh Singh and Ms. Naresh Bakshi, Advocates.
(ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 201-Conviction of paternal uncle of husband of deceased-Deceased committed suicide and charge against husband was of dowry death-Body was cremated without informing police or family of deceased and that injured deceased was not admitted in any hospital-2nd appellant appeared to be a party to secret disposal of dead body-Knowledge could be attributed to him that offence had been committed and he caused disappearance of evidence-Conviction and sentence of two years imprisonment called for no interference. (Para 10)
ORDER
The appellants challenge the order of conviction and sentence passed against them by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala which was confirmed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The first appellant was convicted under Sections 304-B and 201 IPC and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years respectively. The second appellant was found guilty under Section 201 IPC and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years.
2. The incident happened on 13-10-1988. Shinder Kaur the daughter of PW-2 was married to the first appellant Dhian Singh about two and a half years prior to her death. After the marriage Shinder Kaur stayed with her husband for about one year. It was alleged that the first appellant, the husband, wanted more dowry and started harassing her so she left her matrimonial home and started staying with her parents. Then at the intervention of the local panchayatdars a settlement was effected and about two months prior to her death, she left her parents house and again started staying with the appellant Dhian Singh. On 22.10.1988, PW-2 came to know that his daughter Shinder Kaur was burnt to death. He immediately went to the police station and gave information to the police. The police registered a case and started investigation and during investigation it was revealed that the accused had disposed off the dead body on 13.10.1988 itself by cremating the body.
3. On the side of the prosecution PW-1 to PW-8 were examined and on the defence side DW-1 Tara Singh was examined. The Sessions Court held that the deceased Shinder Kaur died of burn injuries and the first appellant Dhian Singh was responsible for cruelty on account of demand for dowry and thus committed the offence under Section 304-B I.P.C. The first appellant was also held responsible for committing the offence under Section 201 IPC.
4. We heard learned counsel for the appellants and counsel for the respondent.
5. The counsel for the appellant urged before us that there was absolutely no evidence to show that the first appellant had ever demanded any dowry from PW-2. It was also contended that the prosecution failed to produce any evidence to show that there was any cruelty on the part of the first appellant. The contention of the appellant is not correct. PW-2 gave evidence to the effect that the appellant had demanded dowry and he demanded television set and PW-2 could not give the same and therefore the deceased was sent back to her parental home. It is also important to note that the deceased left the house of husband as she could not bear the miserable life in his house and there was a panchayat also to settle the dispute. Admittedly, the deceased Shinder Kaur died of burn injuries. It was proved that incident happened within the period of seven years of her marriage. Section 304-B defines the Dowry death and it states that the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband or in connection with any demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. In the instant case, it is proved that she died of burn injuries and it was not under normal circumstances. The evidence also show that the husband caused harassment, that is why she could not live with him in the matrimonial home and started staying with her parents.
6. Section 113-B of the Evidence Act enables the Court to draw presumption in such circumstances to the effect that, when the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment or in connection with any demand for dowry,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.