Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
ACHINTA DEKA S/O LATE GAURI DEKA – Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
Crl. Appeal No. 325 of 2023, I.A. (Crl.) No. 810 of 2023
Decided On : 28-06-2024
DOWRY DEATH - CRIMINAL LAW - IPC Sections 304B, 306; Cr.PC Section 374(2); Indian Evidence Act Section 113B - The court discussed the provisions of Sections 304B and 306 of the IPC, which pertain to dowry death and abetment of suicide, respectively. It emphasized that to establish a case under Section 304B, the prosecution must prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry shortly before her death. The court also highlighted the presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, which allows for a presumption of guilt if the ingredients of Section 304B are satisfied. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the necessary elements of the case, leading to the conclusion that the conviction was erroneous.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Sections 306 and 304B of the IPC for the alleged dowry death of his wife, who was found hanging shortly after returning to his home. The prosecution claimed that the deceased was subjected to physical and mental torture for dowry demands, leading to her suicide. The informant, her father, alleged ongoing abuse and dowry demands, while the defense argued that the evidence was insufficient to establish guilt.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution's evidence was largely based on hearsay and lacked direct corroboration. Key witnesses contradicted the claims of dowry demands and abuse, indicating that the deceased suffered from health issues that contributed to her mental state. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish the necessary elements of Sections 304B and 306 IPC beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues: Whether the prosecution proved that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry shortly before her death, and whether the appellant abetted her suicide.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that to convict under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry shortly before her death. The presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act applies only if these elements are established. The court found that the prosecution did not meet this burden, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction and acquitted the appellant of all charges, ordering his immediate release from jail.
JUDGMENT :
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
1. Heard Mr. NNB Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent and Mr. R. Boruah, learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. This is an appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC) for setting aside the Judgment dated 26.07.2023 and the subsequent Order dated 27.07.2023 passed by the learned Addl. Session Judge (FTC) Barpeta in Sessions Case No. 184/2021 (Arising out of GR Case No. 3519/2020) and Sarthebari PS Case No. 279/2020 convicting the appellant under Sections 306/304B of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304B of the IPC and to undergo RI for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only, in default, of payment of fine to undergo SI for another period of 6 months under Section 306 of IPC.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 06.08.2020, the Police received information that the deceased is found hanging in the house of the accused and accordingly registered Unnatural Death Case (UD Case) vide No. 23/2020 and visited the place of occurrence and got the inquest over the dead body. Subsequently, PW-1 lodged an FIR on 06.08.2020 alleging inter alia that the accused alongwith his father and mother have been torturing his daughter (deceased) both physically and mentally by demanding dowry after few days of their marriage. It is further alleged that after receiving dowry, the accused did not stop torturing the deceased, for which the deceased ultimately left the house of the accused and started staying with the informant. It is further alleged that after assurance given by the alleged husband not to torture the deceased, the informant left the deceased in the house of the accused on 03.08.2020 and on 04.08.2020 at about 8:00/8:30 in the night, the deceased called the informant and told him that the accused threatened to kill her. It is further alleged that on 05.08.2020 at 5:45/5:50 AM, the father of the accused informed the informant that his daughter expired. It is further alleged that after going to the house of the accused, the informant found the deceased hanging in their bed room. Accordingly, a case was registered under Sections 302/34 of the IPC.
4. Upon registration of the FIR, Police started recording the statement of witnesses and search for the accused but could not found him. On 13.10.2020, the accused surrendered at the Police Station and upon arresting him, the Investigating Officer forwarded him to the judicial custody. On the conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet and thereafter, the Trial Court framed charge against the accused under Sections 306/304B of the IPC.
5. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses and the accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.PC, wherein he denied the incriminating circumstances and refused to adduce evidence in defence. The Trial Court upon conclusion of the trial and hearing found the accused guilty under Sections 304B/306 IPC and accordingly convicted him.
6. Mr. NNB Choudhury, learned counsel for the accused submits that the GD Entry based on which the investigation was started was not exhibited and hence, fatal to the prosecution case. He further submits that the inquest over the body was done on the basis of such GD Entry and that the FIR was lodged thereafter. He further submits that there is no direct evidence to show that the accused instigated the deceased to commit suicide and hence, no case of abetment is made out. He further submits that the prosecution has failed to prove the ingredients prerequisite to constitute an offence under Section 304B of the IPC. He further submits that though PW-1 has stated in his evidence-in-chief that the accused used to physically and mentally torture the deceased, later on, during cross examination, he admitted that when he had left his daughter/deceased at t
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the elements of cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry to establish a case under Section 304B IPC; mere suspicion is insufficient for convic....
The requirement of substantial evidence of dowry-related harassment is essential to sustain a conviction under Section 304-B of IPC, which the prosecution failed to demonstrate.
Conviction upheld - Dowry death - there was persistent demand of dowry made by accused from the victim who was used to subjected to cruelty and harassment for such demand and ultimately she had ended....
The court affirmed the conviction for murder and dowry death, establishing a proximate link between dowry-related cruelty and the victim's death.
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.
The burden lies on the prosecution to establish the ingredients of Sec. 304-B, and once proved, the presumption under Sec. 113-B comes into play. The accused can then attempt to displace the deemed c....
To convict under Section 304B IPC, evidence of specific instances of cruelty or harassment connected with dowry demands must be established; otherwise, lesser offences may be considered.
The court established that dowry death under Section 304(B) IPC requires proof of harassment related to dowry demands, with the prosecution bearing the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
