The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to establish a live link between cruelty based on dowry demand and the victim's death, as well as the burden on the accused to provide a plausible explanation for the death in cases of murder committed in secrecy inside a house.

JUDGMENT :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

Ranjit Ram, Jaydhar Ram and Balmanti Devi were put on trial for committing the offence under sections 498-A and 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. By an order dated 29th July 2015 an alternative charge under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code was also framed against them.

3. Kuru PS Case No. 1 of 2011 was lodged against Ranjit Ram who is the husband, Shankar Ram who is the brother-in-law, Jaydhar Ram who is the father-in-law and Balmanti Devi who is the mother-in-law of Sumanti Devi @ Balak for committing her murder in furtherance of common intention and for causing harassment and torture in relation to demand of dowry.

4. In ST Case No. 56 of 2011 Jaydhar Ram and Balmanti Devi have been acquitted of the charge framed under sections 498-A, 304-B and 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The trial judge has held that the evidence against Jaydhar Ram and Balmanti Devi is not sufficient to hold that they also caused harassment and torture to Sumanti Devi in connection to demand of dowry soon before her death.

6. Ranjit Ram has also been acquitted of the charge under sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

7. The trial Judge has discussed the prosecution evidence to establish the charge for offence under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code in the following manner:

“11. Having heard both the sides on the point of relevancy, sanctity as well as evidentiary value of the witnesses examined by the prosecution it is evident that deceased Sumanti Devi died in suspicious circumstances at her in-law's house within 7 years of her marriage. I do share the view of learned Addl.P.P. that, U/s 113 (B) of the Evidence Act there is presumption of law against the accused unless and until it is rebutted by adducing evidence to substantiate the cause of death. The accused can not be exonerated from the presumption as laid down U/s 113 (B) Evidence Act.

However, at the same time it is a law that, the presumption U/s 13 (B) Evidence Act is of any significance for conviction U/s 304 (B) IPC, if the death has occurred within 7 years of marriage. It must be proved by the prosecution that, the victim was subjected to cruelty by the accused in connection with demand of dowry and said death has been caused to the victim otherwise then under normal circumstances within 7 years of her marriage.

12. Evidently sharp cut injury was found on the back portion of the occipital region of Sumanti Devi above left ear and she died at her in-law's house. The victim died in suspicious condition therefore, the burden is on the accused to explain how the deceased died.

From the written report of the informant there is no whisper of demand of dowry. There is only allegation in the FIR that the accused persons often assault and abused the deceased nothing in the FIR why the accused tortured her and there is no whisper of demand of dowry.

In a decision reported in 2006 (2) Acquittal 658 SC Hon'ble Apex Court opined that, "evidence did not show that any demand of dowry was made. Essential ingredient of dowry death i.e. demand for dowry was not establishes, conviction could not be sustained."

Before I deal with oral evidence adduced by the prosecution it is desirable to deal with the law of dowry death whether the evidence adduced has any nexus with the ingredients contained U/s 304(B) IPC.

In making out the offence of dowry U/s 304 (B) IPC following ingredients have to be proved by the prosecution.

(A) Death of the woman must have been occurred otherwise then under normal circumstances.

(B) Such death must have been occurred within seven years of her marriage.

(C) Soon before her death she must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband.

(D) Such cruelty or harassment must be in connection with the demand of the dowry. It is settled law that when the death occurs under unnatural circumstances it is immaterial whether it was result of suicide or homicide. Even a