Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Chakradhari Sharan Singh, Nawneet Kumar Pandey, JJ.
Chandan Rai Son of Ramdayal Rai - Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.177 of 2020
Decided On : 29-08-2023
DOWRY DEATH - Murder and Dowry Prohibition - IPC Sections 304B, 498A; Evidence Act Section 113B - The court discussed the essential elements required to establish dowry death under Section 304B of the IPC, emphasizing the need for proof that the marriage occurred within seven years prior to the death and that there was a proximate link between dowry demand and the death. The court also highlighted the importance of the deceased's mental and physical state when making a dying declaration, referencing Section 113B of the Evidence Act, which allows for a presumption of dowry death if cruelty or harassment is proven. The failure of the prosecution to establish these elements influenced the court's decision to acquit the appellant.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, husband of the deceased, was convicted for dowry death and cruelty under IPC Sections 304B and 498A, following allegations of dowry demands and subsequent burning of the deceased. The case arose from a fardbeyan recorded by the deceased before her death, claiming torture for dowry demands. The prosecution presented 17 witnesses, but many were declared hostile, and the evidence regarding the marriage duration and dowry demands was inconsistent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the marriage occurred within seven years of the death and that there was a clear link between the alleged dowry demands and the death. The court also noted the lack of medical evidence to support the deceased's ability to make a reliable dying declaration, leading to doubts about the prosecution's case.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution proved that the deceased was married to the appellant within seven years prior to her death? 2. Whether there was sufficient evidence of dowry demand and cruelty? 3. Whether the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make a dying declaration?
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the prosecution must establish a clear connection between the demand for dowry and the death of the woman, as well as the mental and physical fitness of the deceased at the time of making a dying declaration. The absence of reliable evidence on these points led to the conclusion that the conviction was not sustainable.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellant of the charges under IPC Sections 304B and 498A, setting aside the previous conviction and sentence, and allowed the appeal.
JUDGMENT :
Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.
This appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the CrPC against the judgment of conviction dated 20.01.2020 and the order of sentence dated 22.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Sessions Trial No. 329 of 2017, arising out of Bhagwanpur P.S. case no. 210 of 2016, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:
| Appellant | Conviction under Section | Sentence | ||
| Imprisonment | Fine (Rs.) | In default of fine | ||
| Chandan | 304-B/34 of the IPC | R.I. for 12 years |
|
|
| Rai | 498-A/34 of IPC | R.I. for 03 years | 25,000/- | R.I. for 03 months |
2. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
3. The appellant is the husband of the deceased. The fardbeyan of the deceased, said to have been recorded by an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Ashok Trivedi (PW-16) on 02.12.2016 at 3:30 pm in Sadar Hospital is the basis for registration of Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 210 of 2016 on 03.12.2016 at 5:30 pm disclosing commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 323, 307, 326, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Since the deceased subsequently died on 07.12.2016, Section 304B of the IPC came to be added under the orders of the court below. According to her fardbeyan, (i) the appellant, (ii) father-in-law of the deceased, Ram Dayal Rai, brother-in-laws of the deceased, namely (iii) Pancham Rai, (iv) Ranjan Rai, (v) Methur Rai, sister-in-laws, (vi) Sarita Devi, (vii) Meena Devi and mother-in-law, (viii) Kamli Devi, used to torture her for demand of dowry to the tune of Rs. 2 lakhs. As the family members of the informant were not in a position to meet the demand, all the accused persons putting kerosene oil on her body and set her on fire. Further, according to her fardbeyan, she had a son aged nearly six years. upon hearing her screams, persons from the neighbourhood came and rescued her, whereafter, they took her to the Sadar Hospital, Hajipur.
A fardbeyan of the brother of the deceased, Rakesh Kumar Rai (PW-7) was also recorded on 07.12.2016 at Patna Medical College Hospital, Patna at 2:30 P.M. by Sub-Inspector, D.K. Singh, where the deceased was taken for further treatment, in course of which she died. PW-7, in his fardbeyan recorded on 07.12.2016, also made allegations of demand of dowry and torture. He further alleged in the fardbeyan that the deceased was married nearly six years prior to the date of occurrence to the appellant and that the deceased had a child aged nearly six years. He also alleged that this appellant and in-laws of the deceased killed her by setting her on fire after pouring kerosene oil on her. Upon completion of investigation, the police submitted chargesheet against the appellant on 31.03.2017 for the offences punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, whereupon cognizance was taken on 15.05.2017 and the case was committed to the court of Sessions for trial.
4. The charges were framed for commission of offences punishable under Section 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, an alternative charge was framed for the appellant for commission of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant denied the charge and claimed to be tried.
5. At the trial, the prosecution got examined altogether 17 witnesses. In addition to the oral evidence adduced at the trial, the prosecution brought on record the documentary evidence by way of exhibits namely the fardbeyan of the deceased (exhibit-1), endorsement of S.I., Ashok Trivedi (PW-16), over the fardbeyan, signature of Rakesh Kumar (PW-7) over his statement as exhibit-2. Chargesheet was brought on record by way of exhibit-3 and the postmortem report as exhibit-5. The endorsement of Station House Officer over the FIR wa
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the essential elements of dowry death, including the timing of the marriage and the link between dowry demands and the death, as well as the decease....
Dying declarations must be consistent for legal value; inconsistent declarations undermine grounds for conviction under dowry death charges.
The court emphasized the necessity of corroborating dying declarations and established that dowry-related cruelty leading to death constitutes an offence under Section 304B IPC.
The conviction for dowry death requires proof of harassment and demand for dowry preceding the death, establishing a presumption that the accused caused the death, which is rebuttable by the defense.
The conviction under Section 304B of IPC for dowry death was upheld based on established evidence of cruelty and demands for dowry, fulfilling necessary legal criteria without substantial rebuttal fr....
The admissibility of dying declarations without a certification of the victim's mental state and the reliance on circumstantial evidence in establishing guilt.
The prosecution successfully proved that the victim was subjected to torture by the appellant and his parents on demand of dowry, leading to her unnatural death within seven months of her marriage.
For a conviction under S.304-B, evidence of recent cruelty or harassment is essential; absence of such evidence leads to acquittal.
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
