SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(All) 2423

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.
IRASHAD - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 2002
Decided on : 24-11-2017

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :K.K. Tewari, N. Shritria, Mr. Rakesh Srivastava and Mr. Vivek Shrotia, Advocates.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove cruelty and dowry demand for a conviction under Section 304-B IPC.

Headnote:

DOWRY DEATH - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, 304-B - The court discussed the evidence related to dowry demand, cruelty, and the death of the deceased. It highlighted the absence of evidence supporting the dowry death charge and emphasized the importance of proving cruelty and dowry demand for a conviction under Section 304-B IPC.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased, Mehnaz, died from burn injuries, and the accused-appellant was convicted under Section 304-B IPC for dowry death. The prosecution alleged dowry demand and cruelty by the accused and his family.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the evidence did not support the dowry death charge. It emphasized the poor financial condition of the deceased's family, the absence of evidence of dowry demand, and the lack of support for the prosecution's allegations.

Issues: The issues included the validity of the conviction under Section 304-B IPC in the absence of a charge and conviction under Section 498-A IPC, the conviction of the accused-appellant when three other accused were acquitted, and the proof of dowry demand and cruelty before the death.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for a conviction under Section 304-B IPC, there must be evidence of cruelty and dowry demand. It highlighted the importance of proving these elements and the lack of support for the prosecution's allegations.

Final Decision: The trial court's judgment and order convicting the accused-appellant under Section 304-B IPC were set aside, and the accused-appellant was acquitted of the charge.

JUDGMENT :

DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.01.2002 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, FTC No.2, Unnao, in Session Trial No.29 of 1999. The accused appellant has been convicted under Section 304-B IPC and sentenced to undergo eight years rigorous imprisonment. The other three accused namely Naushad (elder brother) Smt Hamidan (mother) and Jalil Shah (father) of the accused appellant have been acquitted of all the charges.

3. The prosecution story as emerges is that Mehnaz (deceased) who got married to the accused-appellant three months before the date of incident i.e.31.8.1998 died out of the burn injuries on the spot. After receiving the information complainant, the mother of Shahnaz and mother-in-law of the accused-appellant along with PW2 (Rajjab Ali) visited hospital at Unnao where they found dead body of the deceased lying sealed. On 01.09.1998 when the complainant along with P.W.2 who happened to be her another son-in-law visited the hospital at Unnao they did not make any complaint in respect of the death of the deceased. However, thereafter on 03.09.1998, a written complaint was given to the Superintendent of Police, Unnao alleging that Mehnaz used to be tortured for demand of dowry by accused-appellant-husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased. They used to demand one gold chain, one gold ring and Rs. 10,000/- cash and since, she being the poor and widow lady living in a hut having no means to satisfy the demand of the dowry of the accused-appellant, she could not fulfils the demand of dowry of the accused named in the complaint. The First Information Report was lodged on the basis of the said complaint alleging that the deceased was burnt alive by the accused by putting her fire after pouring kerosene oil on her body.

4. The prosecution examined in all six witnesses. P.W.1. The complainant and PW2 Rajjab Ali are the witnesses of fact. P.W.1 in her statement specifically said that she does not have a house, she does not have any agricultural land and she barely meets her both ends. She made her financial condition known to the accused-appellant and others who were named in the First Information Report that she was very poor and she would not be able to give any dowry. Despite knowing fully well the financial condition, the accused persons agreed for marriage and the marriage was performed.

5. She further said that no FIR was lodged earlier by her with respect to demand of dowry by the accused. Though Naushad Ali the elder brother of the accused-appellant was named in the First Information Report but she did not know whether he along with his wife and children was living with the accused appellant and his parents or not. She also did not know where the dead body of the deceased Mehnaz was buried. She denied suggestion that there was no demand of dowry and Mehnaz never complaint.

6. P.W.2, who was the other son-in-law of the PW1 deposed to the effect that he was aware of the fact that accused-appellant was working in Mirza Tannery but with respect to Naushad whether he was living with the accused appellant or his parents or he was living separately, he said that he was not aware of. He had never visited the residence of the accused-appellant. His evidence is completely vague except for that the accused-appellant and others named in the First Information Report used to demand dowry of one gold chain, one ring and Rs. 10,000/-.He did not give any particulars when the said fact was told to him by the deceased and when and where did he meet the deceased.

7. The inquest report which was prepared on 01.09.1998 clearly says that in the opinion of inquest witnesses, the cause of death was the fire which got generated at the time of cooking food by the deceased and out of the fire the whole house as well as the deceased got burnt and she di












































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top