SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Pat) 665

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, JITENDRA KUMAR, JJ.
Manu Sharma @ Munnu Sharma son of Late Ramnarayan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.554 of 2017
Decided on : 28-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, APP

The court established that dowry death under Section 304(B) IPC requires proof of harassment related to dowry demands, with the prosecution bearing the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Section 304

(B) - Dowry Prohibition Act - Section 3(4) - Conviction for dowry death - Appellant sentenced to life imprisonment and fines under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act - Evidence established demand for dowry and harassment leading to death - Conviction upheld, but sentence modified to ten years. (Paras 50, 49, 48)

(B) Presumption of guilt - Under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, presumption arises if cruelty or harassment is shown soon before death - Burden on prosecution to prove foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 30, 28)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for the dowry death of his wife, Jyoti Kumari, who was subjected to harassment for dowry demands. The informant reported her death as a result of strangulation. (Paras 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court found the appellant guilty based on evidence of dowry demands and harassment, establishing a connection to the victim's death. (Paras 49, 48)

Issues: Whether the conviction and sentence under Section 304

(B) IPC and Section 3(4) of the Dowry Prohibition Act are sustainable. (Para 13)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution proved the essential elements of dowry death, and the appellant failed to rebut the presumption of guilt. (Paras 49, 50)

Result: Appeal allowed in part; sentence modified to ten years. (Para 51)

JUDGMENT :

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR)

The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.03.2017 and 28.03.2017 respectively passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Kaimur at Bhabua in Sessions Trial No. 68 of 2015 (Trial No. 152/2016) arising out of Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 69 of 2014 registered against three accused persons, including the Appellant herein, for the offences punishable under Section 304(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. By the impugned judgment, the Appellant has been found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act and he has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- under Section 304(B), and in case of default to pay the fine, to undergo additional simple imprisonment for six months, and to undergo simple imprisonment of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act and in case of default to pay the fine, to undergo additional simple imprisonment for three months.

3. The prosecution case, as unfolded by the fardebayan of the informant Dinanath Sharma on 21.04.2014 at 18:10 O’clock at the house of the Appellant to the police officer is that he had married off his daughter Jyoti Kumari @ Rina to the Appellant/Manu Sharma three years back as per Hindu Rites and Customs. After the marriage, his daughter started living at her matrimonial home, but since then, the son-in-law/Appellant Manu Sharma and his elder brother Munna Sharma and wife of Munna Sharma started pressurizing his daughter to bring additional dowry i.e. golden chain and other items and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, she was subjected to harassment. On being informed by his daughter, the informant and other persons went to the matrimonial home of his daughter to persuade them not to do such things. But despite that, the people of the matrimonial home kept subjecting his daughter to torture. On the day of the fardbayan, the informant got information at 5:00 O’clock in the evening that his daughter has been killed by his son-in-law Manu Sharma (Appellant) and his brother Munna Sharma and wife of Munna Sharma and they are preparing for her last rites. After this information, the informant along with his son and brother came to the matrimonial home of his daughter and found that his daughter Jyoti Kumari @ Rina has been killed and kept on a cot in the verandah and preparation was going on for her last rites. On seeing the dead body, he found that she was strangulated by rope to death. In his fardbayan, he has claimed that his daughter Jyoti Kumari @ Rina has been killed by his son-in-law Manu Sharma (Appellant), his brother Munna Sharma and the wife of Munna Sharma.

4. After lodging of the F.I.R., investigation commenced and after investigation, charge-sheet bearing no. 88 of 2014 dated 31.10.2014 was submitted against all the three F.I.R. Accused persons, including the Appellant for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 304(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the three Accused persons and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the charge was framed by the Sessions Court on 15.05.2015 under Section 304(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The charges were read over and explained to the Accused persons for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and hence, the trial commenced.

5. During trial, the following six witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

    (i) P.W.-1 – Munna Sharma (Brother of the deceased)

    (ii) P.W.-2 – Pawan Sharma (Brother of the deceased)

    (iii) P.W.-3 – Gorakh Sharma (Uncle o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top