2013 Supreme(Raj) 959
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mohammad Rafiq, Jainendra Kumar Ranka, JJ.
Pawan Goyal & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 970 of 2005.
Decided On : 20-03-2013
For the Accused-Appellants:N.C. Choudhary with Vijay Choudhary, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Javed Choudhary, Public Prosecutor.
In order to establish a case of dowry death under Section 304B of the IPC, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry soon before her death.
Headnote:
The court acquitted the accused of charges under Sections 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for cruelty and dowry death, respectively. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry soon before her death. The court also found that the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act could not be raised in this case.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Asha, died due to poisoning within seven years of her marriage to the accused, Pawan Goyal. The prosecution alleged that Asha was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and his family members for, or in connection with, a demand for dowry. The accused denied the allegations and claimed that Asha committed suicide due to depression.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Asha was subjected to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry soon before her death. The court noted that there was no evidence of any physical cruelty or abuse, and that Asha had not written any letters or made any statements alleging that she was being harassed for dowry. The court also found that the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act could not be raised in this case, as the prosecution had not established that Asha's death was caused by cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, a demand for dowry.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry soon before her death? 2. Whether the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act could be raised in this case?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry soon before her death. The court also found that the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act could not be raised in this case, as the prosecution had not established that Asha's death was caused by cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, a demand for dowry.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the accused of charges under Sections 498A and 304B of the IPC.
JUDGMENT
1. - This appeal by appellants Pawan Goyal, Kedarmal Gupta & Anar Bai seeks to challenge the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 15/10/2005 whereby they were convicted for offence u/S.498A IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of three years with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default whereof, were to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months. Appellants were also convicted for offence u/S.304B IPC and were sentenced to life imprisonment with a rider that they shall not be released till their last breath. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.Preliminary Facts:-
2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are that a written report was submitted by Brahmdutt (PW1) to Mahila Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur on 3/3/2000 inter-alia alleging that his grand-daughter Smt.Asha @Kanta D/o Shri Murarilal was married with Pawan Goyal S/o Kedarmal on 11/3/1996. Since her father Murarilal was deaf & dumb, entire arrangements of marriage were made by him. At the time of marriage, parents of Pawan Goyal said that they did not want any dowry but marriage should be solemnized in a good way. Yet, they sent a list of dowry articles consisting of furniture and other goods to Vishwesharlal, the mediator on whose persuasion the parties agreed for this marriage. They wanted that minimum Rs. 4 lacs should be spent in the marriage, out of which, Rs. 1.5 lacs should be given in cash and that dowry articles should be sent in advance. The informant gave Rs. 88,000/- in advance to them for purchase of Hero Honda motorcycle, colour television, fridge, dining set etc., which they purchased. Apart from that, a sum of Rs. 2.25 lacs was spent in engagement ceremony. Informant stated that they spent more than their means. Even then after marriage, accused continued to demand amount of Rs. 50,000/-. When Asha went to her in-laws place, her husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law used to taunt her for not paying demanded Rs. 50,000/-. They used to subject her to cruelty and also at times beat her. Whenever she met the complainant-informant and other relatives, she would complain about the same. Asha gave birth to a male child in 1997; at that time, family of the informant gave them customary gifts but their demand of Rs. 50,000/- still persisted. In December, 1999 however they started demanding Rs. 1 lac harassing Asha on such demand. Asha made a phone call on 26/2/2000 from her in-laws place to her aunt Smt.Aruna Gupta at Ajmer and requested her that she should arrange for Rs. 1 lac to be paid to her in-laws. Smt.Aruna Gupta even told that she was crying and complaining against the accused-appellants for harassing her and said that if demand was not satisfied, they would kill her. Thereafter, her uncle Ramgopal Gupta talked to Kedarmal at 7.45 p.m. on 29/2/2000 and requested that Asha should not be harassed and that soon their demand would be satisfied. Informant received the news of death of Asha in the evening of 29/2/2000, from his other relatives. He thereafter attended the 3rd day condolence on 2/3/2000 at Jaipur. Asha told this to her aunt (bua) Smt.Meera Goyal, who visited her husband's house only one day before the death that her in-laws used to misbehave and beat her for not fulfilling their demand of Rs. 1 lac. Informant alleged that another uncle (phupha) Sitaram along with other relatives went to the house of in-laws of Asha in the morning of the day of incident but her in-laws did not allow Asha to meet them. In-laws of Asha had murdered Asha by giving poison because of non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 1 lac. Therefore action be taken against them.
3. The police on the basis of the aforesaid written report registered a regular first information report for offence u/Ss.498A & 304B IPC. Three different investigation officers of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and Additional Superintendent of Police investigated into the matter. Finally, S.H.O. Mahila Police Station on 21/
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
