The court emphasized that for charges under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must establish a prima facie case showing the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment related to dowry shortly before her death.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.

1. The present revision petition under Section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 assails the order dated 11.07.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-05, South-West District, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi whereby charges have been framed against petitioner for offence under Sections 498A/304B of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. A quick reference to brief facts of the case is necessary. The deceased and the petitioner, in the present case, had entered into a wedlock on 22.02.2015, and a child was born out of their marriage. On 28.04.2019, the deceased was found hanging in her matrimonial home pursuant to which a PCR call was made by the petitioner's father. The door of the room, which was found bolted from inside, was broken open by the police officer and the deceased was taken to hospital where she was declared `brought dead'. An FIR under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC was registered on 29.04.2019 against the present petitioner and his father and mother on the basis of complaint of the mother of deceased. The case of the prosecution, before the learned Trial Court was, that 10 days prior to the marriage, the in-laws of deceased had demanded a four wheeler vehicle, a demand which was acceded to by deceased's family after taking loans. Since the day of her marriage, deceased was harassed by her husband and in-laws for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, and the deceased had even left her matrimonial home in May, 2018 and was later found in Haridwar the next day when she was handed over to her brothers who had brought her back to the parental home. Subsequent to this, a police complaint was also made by the deceased, after which the she was taken back to her matrimonial home. On 28.04.2019, the ring ceremony of sister-in-law of deceased's brother was scheduled, in regard to which she had a telephonic conversation with her mother on 27.04.2019, but unfortunately, she was found dead the very next day.

3. The learned Trial Court, after hearing arguments of both prosecution as well as accused, proceeded to frame charge against the petitioner under Sections 498A/304B of IPC, and the proceedings against the parents of the petitioner stood abated due to their death during the course of proceedings. The operative part of the order framing charge dated 11.07.2022 is as under:

"...After having gone through the submissions advanced by counsel for both the parties and perusal of the record, particularly, the statement of mother, brother of the deceased and statement of Shri Sukhbir Saini and complaint of deceased dated 06.05.2018, I find that there is sufficient material on record to presume that accused has committed the offence punishable under Section 498A/304B IPC..."

4. Petitioner, being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, though not disputing the charge under section 498A, has challenged the legality of the order on the grounds that ingredients, essential for constituting offence under Section 304B, are entirely absent in the present case.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are general in nature and the complaint, which ultimately resulted into registration of FIR does not allege any act which shows cruelty or harassment caused, soon before the death of the deceased, so as to frame a charge under section 304B IPC against the petitioner.

6. It is further submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the statements recorded under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C., of the relatives, moth