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

2014 Supreme(Del) 188

High Court of Delhi
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN
Ramesh Kumar & Others
Versus
State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)
Crl.A. No. 540, 571, 572, 574, 576, 578 of 2013
Decided On : 20-01-2014

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants:R.S. Malik, Sahil Malik, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP.

The willful conduct of the husband, including suspicion of the deceased's character and frequent physical violence, constituted cruelty under IPC 498A, leading to the deceased's suicide.

Headnote:

Dowry Death - Cruelty - IPC 498A, 304B, 306 - The court found that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband, leading to her suicide. The court confirmed the conviction of the husband under IPC 498A and 306, while acquitting other appellants. The husband was sentenced to undergo imprisonment and pay a fine.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and in-laws, leading to her suicide. The husband was charged under IPC 498A and 304B.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband, leading to her suicide. The court confirmed the conviction of the husband under IPC 498A and 306, while acquitting other appellants.

Issues: The main issue was whether the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and in-laws, and whether this led to her suicide.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the husband's willful conduct, including suspicion of the deceased's character and frequent physical violence, drove the deceased to commit suicide, constituting cruelty under IPC 498A. The court also applied the statutory presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act to presume abetment of suicide by the husband.

Final Decision: The husband's conviction under IPC 498A and 306 was confirmed, and he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment and pay a fine. The other appellants were acquitted.

Judgment :

V.K. Jain, J.

1. On 6.11.2009, deceased Priyanka, wife of the appellant Ramesh Kumar, daughter-in-law of the appellants Sahib Singh and Raj Rani and sister-in-law of the appellants Manju, Ravinder and Sunil was brought to Saroj Hospital & Heart Institute, Rohini by the appellant Ramesh with history of poisoning. The information in this regard was given by Duty Constable to Police Station Alipur and was recorded there vide DD No.21A. She died soon after arrival at the hospital and information in this regard as given by Dr. Ravi Gupta of the hospital to the Police Station Alipur at about 8.30 pm and was recorded their vide DD No.14A. On death of Priyanka, statement of her father Shri Sukhbir Singh was recorded by the Special Executive Magistrate. In his statement, Shri Sukhbir Singh stated that Priyanka got married to Ramesh in April-2007, but one month after marriage, her in-laws started harassing her. He also alleged that one day they broke her nasal bone, for which she was operated in the hospital in Prashant Vihar. He further alleged that since very beginning, dowry was demanded from him and one day Priyanka informed him on telephone, of the beatings given to her and harassment meted out to her and asked him to call her back through her brother. After half an hour, Ramesh informed him on telephone that his daughter had consumed poison and they were taking her to Jagjivan Ram Hospital. He suspected that his daughter was killed for dowry. He named all the six appellants in his complaint to the Special Executive Magistrate. On the basis of statement given to him by Shri Sukhbir Singh, the Special Executive Magistrate directed registration of a case, whereupon an FIR under Sections 498A/304B of IPC was registered and the investigation was handed over to ASI Hari Om. The postmortem on the dead body of Priyanka was conducted in Babu Jagjivan Ram Samarak Hospital and four ante mortem injuries caused by blunt force were found on her dead body. Injuries number 1 and 2 were opined to be of recent duration whereas injuries number 3 and 4 were stated to be four-five days old.

2. All the appellants were charged under Section 498A and 304B of IPC read with Section 34 thereof. Since they all pleaded not guilty to the charge, as many as 17 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. One witness was also recorded in defence.

3. The following, according to the complainant, were the demands made by the appellants from time to time:

(a) demand by the appellant Sahib Singh of ring for himself and his father, chain and ring for Ramesh and ear-tops for his wife and daughter and one car, at the time the marriage talks took place;

(b) demand and payment of Rs 70,000/- for honeymoon when Priyanka came to her house on 15.04.2007, the next day of marriage;

(c) demand of Rs 10,000/- in cash, 10 costly suits and clothes for the entire family at the time of delivery of child by Priyanka. The demand is alleged to have been met;

(d) demand and payment of Rs 15000/- for the operation of the child of Priyanka and Ramesh;

(e) demand of Rs 3,00,000/- for General Staff Nurse training of Priyanka though the date of demand was not stated, Rs 1,00,000/- is alleged to have been paid by borrowing from Sonu, brother-in-law, the younger son of the complainant;

(f) the appellant Ramesh called the complainant on 06.1.2009 at about 4.00 PM and handed over the phone to Priyanka who complained that she was beaten and was being asked to bring Rs 5,00,000/- from her father for purchase of a plot of land. One AC car is also alleged to have been demanded.

4. PW-3 Shakuntala Devi is the mother of the deceased Priyanka, whereas PW-8 Sandeep Kumar and PW-9 Karambir are her brothers. PW-3 has corroborated the deposition of the complainant as regards demand of ring for Ramesh, his father and grandfather and tops and chain for his mother and sister. She has also corroborated his deposition with respect to demand of Rs 70,000/- for honeymoon, demand of Rs 10,000/- and 10 suits at the





















































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