Back
2010 (7) Supreme 537
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra, JJ.
Satya Narayan Tiwari @ Jolly & Anr. — Appellants
versus
State of U.P. — Respondent(s)
Criminal Appeal No(s). 1168 of 2005
Decided on : 28-10-2010
AIR 1980 SC 898 – Relied upon
(b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Death caused by strangulation and then by burning – Cannot be a case of suicide. (Para 12)
(c) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 304B – Ingredients of section 304B restated. (Para 16)
(2004) 4 SCC 13 – Relied upon
(d) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 304B – Soon before – Impliedly the interval should not be much between the concerned cruelty or harassment and the death in question – There must be existence of a proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the concerned death – If the alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has become stale enough not to disturb the mental equilibrium of the woman concerned, it would be of no consequence. (Para 24)
(2004) 4 SCC 13 – Relied upon
AIR 2005 SC 1504 – Distinguished
(e) Criminal Trial – Interested witness – A bald assertion from the sister of the accused No. 1 that the deceased was suffering from some mental depression for having not conceived could not be believed. (Para 36)
(f) Criminal Trial – Circumstantial evidence – Non-production of the ‘knot’ found around the neck of the deceased taken by the trial judge to be a ground against the prosecution – Incomprehensible as to how the ‘knot’ of cloth found wrapped around the neck of the deceased could be produced before the trial court. (Para 37)
Facts of the case:
1. Geeta (deceased) was married to the appellant No. 1 Satya Narayan Tiwari @ Jolly on 9th December 1997.
2. On 03.11.2000 an FIR was lodged by the father of the deceased Surya Kant Dixit alleging that dowry was being demanded from him and the accused was insisting that a Maruti car be part of the dowry.
3. On 03.11.2000 the first informant received information on telephone that his daughter had died.
4. The appellants the husband and mother-in-law of the deceased were acquitted by the trial court but the High Court convicted them under Sections 304B, 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and awarded life sentence under Section 304B IPC, 3 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 498A, and six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Finding of the Court:
The present case fully answers the test of ‘soon’ before’.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The hallmark of a healthy society is the respect it shows to women.
3. Indian society has become a sick society. This is evident from the large number of cases coming up in this Court (and also in almost all courts in the country) in which young women are being killed by their husbands or by their in-laws by pouring kerosene on them and setting them on fire or by hanging/strangulating them. What is the level of civilsation of a society in which a large number of women are treated in this horrendous and barbaric manner? What has our society become - this is illustrated by this case.
4. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order of the Allahabad High Court dated 12.07.2005.
5. The facts of the case are that Geeta (deceased) was married to the appellant No. 1 Satya Narayan Tiwari @ Jolly on 9th December 1997. On 03.11.2000 an FIR was lodged by the father of the deceased Surya Kant Dixit alleging that dowry was being demanded from him and the accused was insisting that a Maruti car be part of the dowry. He further stated that three months before the date of the incident the first informant along with his relative went to the house of the accused and explained his financial difficulty in giving the Maruti car to the accused but they were insulted by the accused and were told to get out.
6. On 03.11.2000 at about 12 noon the first informant received information on telephone that his daughter had died. The FIR was lodged as stated above and after investigation a charge sheet was filed. The appellants - the husband and mother-in-law of the deceased - were acquitted by the trial court but the High Court convicted them under Sections 304B, 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and awarded life sentence under Section 304B IPC, 3 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 498A, and six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The sentences were to run concurrently.
7. We have carefully perused the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and the judgment of the trial court and other evidence on record. We see no reason to disagree with the judgment and order of the High Court convicting the appellants. In fact, it was really a case under Section 302 IPC and death sentence should have been imposed in such a case, but since no charge under Section 302 IPC was levelled, we cannot do so, otherwise, such cases of bride burning, in our opinion, fall in the category of rarest of rare cases, and hence deserve death sentence.
8. Although bride burning or bride hanging cases have become common in our country, in our opinion, the expression “rarest of rare” as referred to in Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab,1 AIR 1980 SC 898 does not mean that the act is uncommon, it means that the act is brutal and barbaric. Bride killing is certainly barbaric.
9. Crimes against women are not ordinary crimes committed in a fit of anger or for property. They are social crimes. They disrupt the entire social fabric. Hence, they call for harsh punishment. Unfortunately, what is happening in our society is that out of lust for money people are often demanding dowry and after extracting as much money as they can they kill the wife and marry again and then again they commit the murder of their wife for the same purpose. This is because of total commercialization of our society, and lust for money which induces people to commit murder of the wife. The time has come when we have to stamp out this evil from our society, with an iron hand.
10. In the present case, there was a post mortem done by a committee of three Doctors. We have perused the post mortem report. In that report ante mortem injuries were mentioned as under :-
“1. Ligature mark around the neck, 31x7 cms. Base slightly grooved with dark red. On cut section-tissue ecchymosed a tracheal ring compresses. Clotted blood under soft tissue.
2. Superficial to deep burn all over body. Blistered at
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
