Important point
Once the prosecution is able to establish the ingredients of dowry death u/s 304B IPC, presumption against accused starts as enjoined u/s 113-B of Indian Evidence Act though it is rebuttable presumption.

Headnote:(i) Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 304-B, 498-A and 201—Appellants, father-in-law, mother-in-law, husband and younger brother of husband of deceased convicted under—Appeal—Evidence of father of deceased that he had given dowry as per his capacity at the time of marriage but accused used to demand more dowry—About 10 days prior to incident deceased came to house of complainant and informed about demand for Rs. 7000/- raised by accused—Deceased was taken away from complainant’s house by accused husband on pretext that her presence was required on engagement ceremony of brother of husband and on next intervening night deceased died—Deceased was cremated against wishes of complainant who had seen injury marks on body—Death of victim occurred during seven years of her marriage with bodily injury otherwise than under normal circumstances—Ingredients u/s 304-B IPC were established and presumption u/s 113-B Evidence Act arose though it was rebuttable—DW 1 examined on point that deceased was suffering from heart ailment was not acceptable as he was only a matriculate and had worked only as compounder with a doctor in village—Conviction was not liable to be interfered with. (Paras 7 and 8)
(ii) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000—Section 20—Provisions of the Act would be applicable even to those cases initiated and pending for offences committed under the Act of 1986 provided offender had not completed 18 years of age as on 1-4-2001. (Para 11)

Judgment

Sema, J.—Heard parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 8.8.03 passed by the High Court affirming the conviction recorded by the Trial Court.

3. Accused No. 1 Satbir Singh, father-in-law of the deceased, Accused No.2, Pritam Singh, younger brother of the deceased. Accused No.3, Dilbag Singh, husband of the deceased and Accused No.4, Smt. Bohti, mother-in-law of the deceased were put to trial under Sections 304-B, 498-A and 201 IPC. The Trial Court, after considering the evidence and the documents on record, convicted all of them and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years under Section 304-B IPC. They were also sentenced to 3 years RI and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo 1 year RI under Section 498-A IPC. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 were also sentenced to undergo 3 years RI and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo RI for one year under Section 201 IPC. The sentence were, however, ordered to in run concurrently.

4. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that the FIR was lodged by complainant, PW-4, father of the deceased on 14.6.1989 to the effect that he had five daughters and two sons. Smt. Shanti Devi was married to Accused No.3, Dilbag Singh, and at the time of marriage he had given dowry as per his capacity. Subsequently when the deceased used to come from her maternal house, she was asked to make some demand of dowry on the instructions of the family members of her in-laws. It is also stated that after the marriage also, the complainant had given a radio and wrist watch, but not satisfied, accused No.3 and his family members used to demand more dowry. It is also stated that about 10 days back from the date of occurrence that is, intervening night of 13/14 the June, 1989, the deceased Smt. Shanti had come to the house of the complainant and stated that Accused No. 3 Dilbag Singh, Accused No.2, Pritam Singh, Accused No.1, Satbir Singh and Accused No. 4 Smt. Bohti, the mother-in-law of the deceased, asked her to go to the complainants house and bring a sum of Rs. 7,000/- because they wanted to purchase a buffalo. It is also stated that the deceased would not be allowed to reside in in-laws house till she brought Rs.7000/- with her. It is stated that the complainant, being a poor man, could not meet the said demand. On 11.6.1989, A.3, Dilbag Singh came to the house of the complainant and requested him to send the deceased Smt. Shanti with him stating that there was an engagement ceremony of his younger Brother, Pritam Singh on 12.6.1989 and the presence of the deceased will be required. Considering the request, the deceased was sent along with A.3 on 12.6.1989. It is further stated that in the intervening night of 13/14.6.1989 at about 1.30 a.m. A.2 and four others came to the village of the complainant and told him that his daughter was seriously ill. On arrival the complainant noticed that Shanti was already dead and there was blood in her mouth. He requested the accused that he will take the body of his daughter to his village and perform last rites. However, the request was declined and the accused hurriedly called about 15/20 persons from the village and against his wishes the body of the deceased was cremated at about 8.00 a.m.

5. Section 304-B reads as under:-

1. Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs, otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of here 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 for, 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.”

Section 304-B as quoted above, clearly shows that in order to bring the offence within the purview of Section 304-B, the following ingredients are to be fulfilled:-

a) that the death of woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury occurs other than in norma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

2005 Supreme(SC) 1181

Important pointOnce the prosecution is able to establish the ingredients of dowry death u/s 304B IPC, presumption against accused starts as enjoined u/s 113-B of Indian Evidence Act though it is rebuttable presumption.

Cases Referred (4)

Judicial Analysis

Important point
Once the prosecution is able to establish the ingredients of dowry death u/s 304B IPC, presumption against accused starts as enjoined u/s 113-B of Indian Evidence Act though it is rebuttable presumption.