The court upheld the conviction for murder and dowry harassment, emphasizing the burden of proof on the accused and the significance of medical evidence ruling out suicide.

JUDGMENT :

G.JAYACHANDRAN, R.POORNIMA, JJ.

The appellant herein is the first accused in S.C.No.10 of 2016 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Madurai. In connection with the homicide death of his wife on 09.08.2013, the appellant along with 3 of his family members faced trial for offences under Sections 498A, 201, 302 and 302 r/w 34 of IPC. The trial Court found this appellant guilty of charges under Section 498A, 201 and 302 IPC and acquitted rest of the accused for want of proof beyond doubt.

The gist of the prosecution case:

2.1. The appellant-A1/Bhaseer Mohammed and the deceased Rafiyathul Bazaria got married on 07.07.2010. They were living jointly along with A-2 to A-4 at Santhaipettai, Melur Taluk, Madurai. A female child born to them. There was frequent demand and obtainment of cash and jewels by the accused and his family members. Lastly, there was an unlawful demand of Rs.50,000/- for the tonsuring ceremony of the baby.

2.2. On 08.08.2013, Nagoorgani(PW-1), the brother of Rafiyathul Bazaria came from Dubai. He along with his wife and mother went to the house of the first accused to see his sister. They were with her for about one hour and returned back after giving gifts to the new born baby of Rafiyathul Bazaria. Next day, being Ramzan, PW-1 called his other sister Abdulabeevi (PW-2) to greet her. At that time PW-2 informed him that in-laws of Rafiyathul are not allowing her and her child to wear the new dress and ring given by him. Sensing trouble, PW-1 desperately called A-1 and A-2, but there was no proper response from them. Later, at about 11.30 am, A-2 called and informed that there was a fire accident in his house and asked to come Santhaipettai. By the time PW-1 reached the house of the accused, the charred body of his Rafiyathul Bazaria was removed to mortuary at Melur Government Hospital.

2.3. The mother of the deceased gave a complaint suspecting dowry death and same was registered by the Melur Police in Crime No: 467/2013 at 17.00 hrs. The inquest by RDO disclosed dowry harassment, however the report was not conclusive whether it was suicide or homicide. The post mortem report revealed hyoid bone fracture and 100% burn. The doctor opined that the Death due to the burn and asphyxia due to compression of neck. No soot particle seen in larynx and trachea. That eliminated the possibility of suicide. In addition, the confession statement of A-1 and recovery of M.O.1 to M.O 7 based on his confession added support to the prosecution case, that Rafiyathul Bazaria was strangulated to death. To make it to believe it as suicide, the appellant had burned the body pouring kerosene.

2.4. Demand of dowry and complaint by the deceased about cruelty to her family members is spoken by the family members like the brother of the deceased (PW-1), the sister of the deceased (PW-2), the husband of PW-2(PW-3) and the maternal uncle of the deceased (PW-4). The neighbours examined as PW-5 and PW-7 had deposed about the fire in the accused house and death of Rafiyathul charred in the fire. PW-10 is the witness for observation mahazar and seizure from the scene of crime. The confession of the accused recorded in the presence of the Village Administrative Officer and his assistant (PW-12).

2.5. From the rough sketch-Ex.P14 and the evidence of PW-6, it is clear that the first accused and his wife Rafiyathul Bazaria (deceased) were residing in one portion of the first floor, his brother’s family. The second accused and his wife/the third accused were residing in the other portion of the first floor. The fourth accused who is the mother of the accused 1 and 2 was living with them. The occurrence had happened in the portion where the first accused and the deceased were living. The first accused who is expected to give satisfactory explanation for the homicidal death of his wife, pleaded that it was suicide. Whereas the medical evidence had clearly ruled out suicidal death. However, the demand of dowry or cruelty by other members in