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

2025 Supreme(Pat) 737

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA, J.
Shrawan Paswan @ Laddu Paswan, Son of Laghu Paswan @ Prakash - Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.315 of 2006
Decided On : 16-06-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. Vipul Sinha, Amicus Curiae
For the Respondents: Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, App

The prosecution must prove the connection between the death of the woman and dowry demands to secure a conviction under Section 304(B) IPC; absence of evidence leads to acquittal.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 304

(B) and 201 - Appeal against conviction for dowry death and related offences - Conviction and sentence set aside due to lack of evidence linking death to dowry demand. (Paras 25, 21)

(B) Burden of proof in dowry death cases - Prosecution must establish cruelty or harassment before death for conviction under 304

(B). Mere abatement or evidence of suicide does not suffice without demonstrating connection to dowry demands. (Paras 21, 24)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for the dowry death of his wife Pinki, married in 1998, who died under suspicious circumstances in 2000. Informant alleged dowry demands and subsequent violence leading to her death, while the defense claimed suicide post humiliation related to a quarrel. (Paras 2-4, 25)

Findings of Court:
The prosecution failed to prove the link between the death and dowry demands, leading to the acquittal of the appellant. The trial court had erred in its judgment due to lack of direct evidence against the accused. (Paras 21, 25)

Issues: The main issues were the adequacy of evidence proving the appellant's connection to the alleged dowry demands and the circumstances of the deceased's death.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the prosecution did not meet the burden of proof required for dowry death under Section 304

(B) IPC. Evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment related to dowry shortly before her death. Therefore, the conviction was not sustainable. (Paras 21, 24)

Result: The appeal is allowed and the appellant is acquitted. (Paras 25, 28)

JUDGMENT :

RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA, J.

Heard Mr. Vipul Sinha learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as ‘Cr.P.C’) challenging the Judgment of conviction dated 25.02.2006 and order of sentence dated 28.02.2006 in Sessions Trial No. 165 of 2001 arising out of Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 118 of 2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.-II, Lakhisarai whereby and where under the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 304 (B) and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as ‘IPC’) and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for the offence punishable under Section 304 (B) of the IPC and further three years of imprisonment for the offence punishable punishable under Section 201 of the IPC and also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he is also directed to undergo further two months of simple imprisonment and both the sentences will run concurrently.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal is that the informant namely Kishori Paswan (PW-4) made a written report on 15.04.2000 before Officer-In- Charge of Chanan P.S. that on 29.04.1998 his daughter Pinki Kumari (deceased) was married to the appellant (Shrawan Paswan) and after marriage she went to her matrimonial home. After some days she was brought back to her parental home, when she was pregnant and on that time she disclosed that she would not stay in her matrimonial home, because her Sasur, Sas, Bari Gotani, Manighali Gotani, Bhaisur, Maijhala Bhaisur and Dever as also her husband used to torture and assault her for bringing cash of Rs. 10,000/- and a Colour T.V. They were also threatening to leave her and to kill her. After hearing these things, the informant had assured that when he will get money, he will fulfill their demand. The informant's daughter had again went to her matrimonial home when she was about four months pregnant and resided there. The informant's mother had gone to Kumardih on 16.03.2000 to attend the marriage of younger brother of his son-in-law where the informant's daughter had also gone and she had told to her grand-mother that her husband was demanding Rs.10,000/-cash, colour T.V. and one palung and for this reason, she was being assaulted and tortured. On 14.04.2000, in the evening, the informant got information that his daughter was killed by inmates of her sasural. On 15.04.2000, the informant went to Jankidih and there, on inquiry, he came to know that on 12.04.2000, his daughter was killed by the inmates of her sasural and her dead body was burnt (cremated).

4. On the basis of the written report of the informant, an F.I.R. was lodged on 16.04.2000, Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 118 of 2000 dated 16.04.2000 has registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B and 201 read with 34 of the IPC against total seven accused persons and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against total four accused persons namely Shrawan Paswan @ Laddu Paswan, Lal Paswan, Lakshmi Paswan and Charitar Paswan for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 201 read with 34 of the IPC and accordingly the cognizance of offences under Sections 306 and 201 read with 34 of the IPC was taken, against four accused persons and the case was committed to the Court of sessions. The charges were framed against the accused persons which was explained to them and they denied of prosecution taking plea of false implication in the case and claimed to be innocent.

5. On behalf of prosecution altogether 5 witnesses were examined to substantiate the charges leveled against the appellant, who are namely, PW-1 Siya Sharan Paswan, PW-2 Geeta Devi (mother of the deceased), PW-3 Ramsakhi Devi (grandmother of the deceased), PW-4 Kishori Paswan (info

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