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

2018 Supreme(Del) 2326

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
State – Petitioner
Versus
Nafisa @ Anisa & Anr. – Respondents
Crl.Rev. P. 93 of 2016
Decided On : 24-09-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Addl. PP
For the Respondent:Mr. Kapil Singhal, Advocate

The judgment underscores the requirement for specific allegations of dowry demands or harassment for dowry to establish offenses under Section 498A and 304B IPC, and the importance of evidence demonstrating grave suspicion against the accused for framing charges.

Headnote:

Dowry Death - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, Section 498A, Section 304B - The judgment discusses the application of Sections 302, 498A, and 304B of the Indian Penal Code in a case involving allegations of dowry death and cruelty against a woman. The court analyzed the specific allegations and evidence presented to determine the appropriate charges to be framed against the accused.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a revision petition challenging the discharge of the respondents from the commission of offenses under Sections 498A/304B IPC. The deceased had sustained burn injuries and subsequently died, leading to the addition of Section 302 IPC. The trial court declined to frame charges under Section 498A/304B IPC against the accused but framed a charge under Section 302 IPC against the husband.

Finding of the Court:

The court analyzed the allegations in the FIR and the statement of the deceased, noting the absence of specific allegations related to dowry demands or harassment for dowry. The court found that the deceased's statement implicated her husband in the burning incident, without mentioning any harassment or cruelty in relation to dowry. Consequently, the trial court discharged the mother-in-law and the husband under Section 498A and 304B IPC, while framing a charge under Section 302 IPC against the husband.

Issues: The key issues revolved around determining the appropriate charges to be framed against the accused in a case involving allegations of dowry death and cruelty against a woman.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of specific allegations related to dowry demands or harassment for dowry to establish offenses under Section 498A and 304B IPC. It highlighted the importance of evidence and material demonstrating grave suspicion against the accused for framing charges.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the revision petition, finding no infirmity in the trial court's decision to discharge the respondents of the offenses under Section 498A and 304B IPC, while framing a charge under Section 302 IPC against the husband.

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

1. State has filed this revision petition impugning order dated 04.03.2015 in FIR No. 580/2014 under Sections 302/498A/304B Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short), Police Station Gokul Puri, in so far as the order discharges the respondents of the commission of offence under Sections 498A/304B IPC.

2. Respondent No. 1 was the mother-in-law of the deceased. Respondent no. 2 was the husband of the deceased.

3. By the impugned order on charge, trial court has declined to frame charges under Section 498A/304B IPC against either of the two accused, however, has framed a charge under Section 302 IPC against respondent no. 2, the husband.

4. Subject FIR was registered on the complaint of the deceased who had sustained burn injuries. A call was received and when the Constable reached the house of the complainant, she was found in a fully burnt condition and was taken to hospital. Doctor declared that she had sustained 95% to 100% burns, however, was fit for statement. Her statement was recorded by the concerned SDM. On her statement, subject FIR was registered under Section 498A/307/34 IPC. Subsequently, two days later, the complainant died due to burn injuries. On her death, Section 302 IPC was added.

5. It would be expedient to refer to the FIR, which was recorded on the statement of the victim. The English translation of the same reads as under:-

“Statement of Nazmin, Wife of Boby dated 10.06.2014, at 9.15 am. I Nazmin, D/o Late Latif and Wife of Adil @ Boby, Resident of H. No. F-2, Gali No. 2, Sundar Nagri, Delhi, Aged about 19 years do hereby solemnly affirm that my marriage was solemnized on 24.03.2014 according to the rites and rituals of Muslim Community and my parents had given sufficient dowry according to their status. On 09.06.2014, I along with my father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister of my mother-in-law Anisa came back from my parental home to my matrimonial home at around 7 pm. I cooked for all the family members and after having food my husband told me that you came here to drink my blood and he hit me thrice by hand and said that I will set you on fire. I was laying on a sofa situated at the outside of the room and my husband lay down on the bed inside and I slept. At about 12.30 am in the midnight I felt that I have been set on fire and while burning I ran towards upstairs where other family members were sleeping and I was shouting. PCR officials took me to Emergency Ward of GTB Hospital. My husband has set me on fire and my mother-in-law Anisa used to harass me. Appropriate legal action may be taken against them. I am giving this statement in my full conscious. LBT Impression of Nazmin”

(underlining supplied)

6. The trial court in the impugned order on charge has taken into account the allegations in the FIR as also the statement of the witnesses recorded and has opined that in none of the statements, there is any allegation with regard to demand of dowry or harassment for dowry.

7. The statement of the deceased to the SDM makes specific allegation against her husband. There is no allegation with regard to any demand for dowry or harassment for dowry. The only allegation against respondent no. 1, the mother-in-law is that she used to harass her. Deceased has not stated that the harassment was because of dowry.

8. Section 498-A IPC reads as under:

“498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, “cruelty”

means—

(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or

(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to











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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top