IMPORTANT POINT
Conviction for dowry death requires consistent evidence of demand and harassment; contradictory evidence leads to benefit of doubt.

JUDGMENT :

Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.

1. Judgment of conviction under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rupees Five Thousand, is under challenge in the instant criminal appeal.

2. As per the FIR, sister of the informant was married on 21.05.2011 with Kapil Ravidas. At the time of marriage, Rs.1,51,000/-cash and valuables were given, but after marriage, Rs.40,000/-was demanded and due to non-fulfillment, her husband and in-laws started torturing her. On 21.08.2011 at 11.45 p.m. he received information on his mobile that his sister is admitted in Chauparan Government Hospital. When he was coming from Hazaribag to Chauparan, he again received call on his mobile to come to his house. He arrived at Rampur at 1.30 a.m. and saw that his sister was lying dead on cot.

3. On the written report, Chauparan P.S Case No.75/11 was registered under Section 304 B of the IPC against the appellant and in-laws. Police on investigation, submitted charge sheet against all named accused persons and they were put on trial for offences under Sections 304 B/34 and Sections 302/34 of the IPC.

4. Altogether twelve witnesses were examined and relevant documents were adduced into evidence and marked as exhibits.

5. Judgment of conviction and sentence has been assailed on the ground that P.Ws. 1 to 5, 6, 8 and 9 are relatives of the deceased. P.Ws.3, 4, & 7 were independent witnesses of Rampur village which was the matrimonial home of the deceased and they have not supported the prosecution case. P.W.-4 was declared as hostile. P.W.-4 and P.W. 7 have not supported the case of prosecution that accused persons were demanding ? 40,000. Other co-accused persons on similar allegations and evidence, have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 304 B and 302 of the IPC .

6. On the point of sentence, it is submitted that the appellant was only 19 years of age at the time of incidence and has already served more than five years eight months imprisonment.

7. Learned A.P.P. has defended the judgment of conviction and sentence.

8. In order to prove the charge under section 304B IPC, the prosecution need to establish the following essential ingredients of the offence:

a. the death of a woman must have been caused by burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances;

b. such death must have occurred within seven years of marriage;

c. soon before her death, a woman must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relatives of her husband;

d. such cruelty or harassment must be for or in connection with the demand for dowry.

9. Under Section 113 B of the Evidence Act, presumption cannot be drawn unless there is some evidence to substantiate the allegation that there was demand of dowry soon before the death.

It has been held in State of Rajasthan v. Teg Bahadur & Others, (2004) 13 SCC 300

“18. Our attention was drawn to Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B of the Penal Code, 1860 by the learned counsel appearing for the accused. A conjoint reading of Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 304-B of the Penal Code, 1860 shows that there must be material to show that soon before her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. The prosecution has to rule out the possibility of a natural or accidental death so as to bring it within the purview of “death occurring otherwise than in normal circumstances”. For the above proposition, learned counsel appearing for the accused, cited the judgment of this Court in the case of Hira Lal v. State (Govt. of NCT), Delhi [(2003) 8 SCC 80 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 2016] . In that case this Court observed thus: (SCC pp. 86-87, para 9)

“The expression ‘soon before’ is very relevant where Section 113-B of the Evidence Act and Section 304-B IPC are pressed into service. The prosecution is obliged to show that soon before the occurrence there was cruelty or harassment and only in that case presumption opera