Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L. NAGESWARA RAO, HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.
WASIM – Appellant
Versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI – Respondent(s)
Criminal Appeal No. 1061 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.193 of 2019)
Decided On : 18-07-2019
(b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 306 - Mens rea and active or direct act leading deceased to commit suicide essential for invoking section 306 - Instantly, appellant being found guilty of subjecting deceased to mental cruelty leading her to suicide, trial court rightly convicted appellant u/s 306. (Para 13)
(c) Administration of justice - Trial court convicting appellant u/s 498A for mental cruelty and not for demand of dowry - High Court convicting appellant for demand for dowry - No discussion - Not permissible. (Para 13)
Facts of the case:
By the time he reached, the body of the deceased i.e. Moniya had already been brought down from hanging position. Ashwani (PW-12), the brother of the deceased was found sitting besides the body of the deceased. The elder brother of the Appellant was also present. A suicide note was seized. PW-23 sent the body of the deceased for postmortem. The statement of Ashwani was recorded by PW-23. Inquest was conducted by the Executive Magistrate on the next day. According to the post-mortem, the cause of death of Moniya was due to asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging.
Finding of the Court:
High Court ought not to have convicted the Appellant under Section 498A for demand of dowry without a detailed discussion of the evidence on record, especially when the Trial Court found that there is no material on record to show that there was any demand of dowry.
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.
Leave granted.
1. On receipt of information on 27.10.2015 about a suicide, PW-23 Sub-Inspector Bijender Dahia attached to Police Station Aman Vihar rushed to Nithari village, Delhi. By the time he reached, the body of the deceased i.e. Moniya had already been brought down from hanging position. Ashwani (PW-12), the brother of the deceased was found sitting besides the body of the deceased. The elder brother of the Appellant was also present. A suicide note was seized. PW-23 sent the body of the deceased for postmortem. The statement of Ashwani was recorded by PW-23. Inquest was conducted by the Executive Magistrate on the next day. According to the post-mortem, the cause of death of Moniya was due to asphyxia as a result of ante mortem handing.
2. FIR was registered on the statement of Sunita (PW-11), the mother of the deceased on 04.11.2015. A charge sheet was filed on 05.02.2016. Later, charges were framed against the Appellant under Section 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’). 23 witnesses were examined by the prosecution and several documents relied upon to prove the guilt of the Appellant. The Trial Court convicted the Appellant under Section 498A and 306 IPC. Sentence of three years’ simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 498A IPC and four years simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 306 IPC was imposed on the Appellant. The appeal filed by the Appellant was partly allowed by the High Court. The Appellant was acquitted for the offence under Section 306 IPC. The conviction and sentence under Section 498A IPC was upheld by the High Court. Hence, this appeal.
3. The deceased Moniya who was working as a teacher was married to the Appellant on 02.05.2015. PW-11 Sunita deposed that her daughter Moniya was being harassed by the Appellant by demanding dowry. She testified in the Court that on two occasions she gave Rs.40,000/-and Rs.50,000/-to the deceased for handing over the same to the Appellant to meet his demands of dowry. She stated that the same was not informed either to her husband or her son and that she made the payments from her savings. She also spoke about the demand for a bigger car. The Appellant was working in Nagercoil District, Tamil Nadu and he was demanding for air fare to travel to the place of his work. PW-11 further stated that she was informed by the deceased that the Appellant had extra marital relations with one Poonam and he informed the deceased that he intended to marry Poonam after leaving the deceased.
4. The statement of PW-12 Ashwani was recorded on the day of the incident in which he did not mention about the demand of dowry by the Appellant. He stated that the deceased was depressed by the behavior of the Appellant. PW-10 Sukhbir, the father of the deceased, who reached the place of incident also did not accuse the Appellant of any demand of dowry. The suicide note which was seized from the place of incident was proved on a comparison of the admitted hand writing of the deceased from the school records with the suicide note. The suicide note also did not contain any allegation of demand of dowry by the Appellant.
The suicide note which was reproduced in the judgment of the Trial Court is as follows:
“Relations have come heavy on dreams”
Always lived with head ups and never did nay work by which I have to down my neck.
I love a lot to my dad and brother. Today they have tears in their eyes
I have broken from inside. I love a lot to my profession and education.
I have done nothing that is why I cannot tolerate
I want to live my life with Master Ji, He also manipulated. I do not have any complaint to anyone.
5. After examining the evidence on record, the Trial Court held that the demand of dowry was not proved. However, the Trial Court was convinced that the prosecution proved the extra marital relationship of the Appellant with Poonam. The oral evidence relating to the Appellant informing the deceased about such extra marital
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
