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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Talwant Singh, J.
Gulzari - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Crl.Rev.P. 420 of 2021
Decided On : 06-10-2022




The relationship being a live-in arrangement without valid marriage affects the applicability of dowry-related charges under IPC Sections 304B and 498A.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 304B and 498A - Framing of charges - The appellant contested charges based on allegations of dowry and the deceased's status. The court found that the relationship was a live-in arrangement without a valid marriage, impacting the legal applicability of the charges under the stated sections. (Paras 2.2, 4.1, 6, 8)

(B) Legal status - The court emphasized the relevance of proving the marital status at the charge framing stage and determined that the absence of evidence supporting the marriage necessitated the annulment of the charge. (Paras 2.1, 7)

(C) Burden of proof - The court reiterated the need for clear evidence of dowry demands to sustain a charge under Section 498A. (Para 6)

Facts of the case:
The appellant faced charges under IPC for the alleged dowry-related death of the deceased, who was found with ligature marks, following her hospitalization. The petition argued against the charge, citing the nature of the relationship and lack of dowry demands.

Findings of Court:
The court found the framing of charges unjustifiable and set aside the previous order, requiring a fresh hearing to address the legal questions surrounding the relationship of the parties.

Issues: The central issues revolved around the legal status of the relationship between the petitioner and the deceased and whether sufficient evidence of dowry demands existed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the absence of a marriage document and no allegations of dowry in the FIR necessitated reevaluation of the charges, indicating material facts were not adequately considered in the prior ruling.

Result: Impugned order of framing charges set aside.

Table of Content
1. framing of charges under ipc. (Para 1 , 2)
2. live-in relationship status and societal acceptance. (Para 4)
3. court's considerations on charge framing. (Para 5 , 6)
4. material facts affecting charge framing. (Para 7)
5. setting aside of order with directions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

JUDGMENT

Talwant Singh, J. This revision petition has been filed against framing of charge under Section 304B, 498A IPC against the petitioner passed by learned ASJ, Karkardooma Courts in FIR No. 059/2019 under Section 304B IPC registered at PS Madhu Vihar.

2. The brief facts given are that on receipt of a DD bearing No. 61A when the IO reached at Max Hospital, Patparganj, he found one Neetu Jatav W/o Gulzari admitted there vide MLC No. 8908/2019. She was having ligature mark around her neck and the nature of injuries, as opined by doctor was hanging. She was unfit to make statement. She died during treatment on 31.03.2019 in the Hospital. Statement of mother of deceased was recorded and on the basis of her statement, FIR under Section 304B IPC was registered. The petitioner was arrested and Charge Sheet was filed. The case was committed to Sessions Court and the learned ASJ was pleased to frame charges against the petitioner for offences punishable under Section 304B/498A IPC.

2.1. Aggrieved from the said order, the present petition has been filed challenging the order of framing of charge on the ground that the said order is not based upon the facts and the law; the learned Judge has failed to appreciate that the petitioner and the deceased were in love and they were residing together in live-in relationship, so there was no question of any dowry. The FIR itself shows that the deceased ran away from her parental house on 01.08.2017 and she went to present petitioner. It has been submitted that the learned Trial Court has not considered the fact that the complainant was not aware whether any marriage was solemnised or not, so how could she know about allegation of dowry demands.

2.2. It is further submitted that at best, a case is made out against the petitioner under Section 306 IPC and not under Section 304B and 498 IPC. The petitioner is unnecessary in custody since 31.03.2019. Also, there is a minor daughter born 28.06.2018. The deceased had never made any complaint to the Police at any point of time. There is nothing on record to say that the petitioner and deceased were married as per Hindu law though they were residing as husband and wife after falling deeply in love.

2.3. As per the petitioner, the FIR itself registered under Section 304B IPC at the initial stage as the Police itself was not convinced about demand of dowry. The brother of the deceased, namely Jitender has stated in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C that petitioner never demanded any money in his presence. Moreover, the deceased never made any complaint to her brother although she used to talk to him on telephone. There is a minor incident of spilling over of juice and the petitioner scolded the deceased and as soon as he went outside the house, the deceased hanged herself. It was the petitioner who took the deceased to the hospital. Hence, it is prayed that the accused/petitioner be discharged.

3. Notice was issued. Status Report has been filed.

4. It has been reiterated that the petitioner and deceased, were not married and they were in a live-in relationship. There is an 8-month old child of the petitioner and the deceased, and in the birth certificate of the child, the name of the father is that of the petitioner.

4.1. As per the compliant lodged by the mother of the deceased, her husband, namely, Gulzari (present petitioner) used to harass the deceased for sake of dowry, and consequently, the victim has committed suicide under compelling circumstances.

4.2. It is further stated that during further investigation, the accused had disclosed that he married Neetu (deceased) before the photo of God available at his home. There is a minor child from

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