Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
UMESH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.
Ram Nath Yadav - Revisionist
Versus
Sudhir Kumar Yadav and Others - Opposite Parties
Criminal Revision No. 827 of 1995
Decided On : 18-10-2023
Dowry Death - Criminal Revision - Section 498A, 304B/302/34 IPC, and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act - [SUMMARY OF ACTS AND SECTIONS REFERENCED: The court discussed the provisions of Section 304B IPC and Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, emphasizing the elements of dowry death and the presumption as to dowry death. The court also highlighted the admissibility and significance of the dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, citing relevant case law to support the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration. The court emphasized that a dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction if found to be true and voluntary, and can be used without further corroboration. The judgment also emphasized the burden of proof under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, stating that the accused persons failed to discharge their burden, leading to the decision to allow the revision and quash the judgment and order of acquittal.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Gomti Devi, was married to Sudhir Kumar Yadav and died within four months of her marriage due to burn injuries. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for not bringing the demanded dowry, and a dying declaration was recorded in which she accused the accused persons of setting her ablaze. The trial court acquitted the accused, but the revision was allowed, and the judgment and order of acquittal were quashed, reviving the session trial for a fresh decision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dying declaration was admissible and reliable, emphasizing that it can be the sole basis of conviction if found to be true and voluntary. The court also highlighted the failure of the accused persons to discharge their burden of proof under Section 113B of the Evidence Act. As a result, the revision was allowed, and the judgment and order of acquittal were quashed, reviving the session trial for a fresh decision.
Issues: The issues revolved around the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration, the burden of proof under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, and the elements of dowry death under Section 304B IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the admissibility and significance of the dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, citing relevant case law to support the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration. The court also highlighted the burden of proof under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, stating that the accused persons failed to discharge their burden, leading to the decision to allow the revision and quash the judgment and order of acquittal.
Final Decision: The revision was allowed, and the judgment and order of acquittal were quashed, reviving the session trial for a fresh decision.
JUDGMENT :
1. None appeared from the side of the revisionists and alive accused Sudhir and Smt. Aruna, even in revised call. Hence, heard learned AGA for the State and perused the record. This criminal revision is decided on merit.
2. This revision has been preferred against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.03.1995 recorded by ASJ-X, Kanpur Nagar, in ST No.547 of 1989 (State vs. Sudhir Kumar Yadav and others) under Section 498A, 304B/302/34 IPC, and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar
3. The grounds of revision are that the opposite parties, Sudhir Kumar Yadav, husband of the deceased Smt. Gomti @ Garima; Sunil Kumar Yadav, her jeth; Smt. Aruna Yadav, jethani and Smt. Prema Devi, mother-in-law (saas) were all responsible for maltreating the deceased. Sunil Kumar and Smt. Aruna are alleged to have caught the deceased. Prema Devi poured the kerosene on the deceased and Sudhir Kumar (husband) applied a matchstick due to which her entire body got burnt and she died the same day in Ursala Hospital at 10:00 pm on 25.08.1989.
4. From the side of prosecution, PW-1, informant Ram Nath, brother of the deceased, PW-2, Raj Kumar, friend of the informant who had visited the victim's sasural a day before the incident and had heard her complaint about beating etc; PW-3, Dr. A. Rahman, who performed the postmortem, PW-4 HC Sant Kumar Chaturvedi; PW-5 Shyam Lal Yadav – Special Land acquisition officer, who recorded the dying declaration of the deceased on 25.08.1989 at 11:40 a.m. PW-6, Ram Lakhan Yadav, ADM, Kanpur Nagar; PW-7, Dr. S.C. Mishra, who had examined her injuries before her death and PW-8, Jogendra Singh, IO have been examined.
5. The marriage was solemnized on 12.05.1989 and Smt. Gomti was done to death on 25.08.1989 within 04 months of her marriage at her sasural by pouring kerosene on her as the dowry demands of the opposite parties could not be satisfied.
6. The prosecution had also relied upon the dying declaration of the deceased, in which she had clearly stated and assigned specific role to each of the accused persons should not have been brushed aside just because the informant made a little mistake in saying something different relying upon his own memory. Even this dying declaration was enough for conviction of the opposite parties which had been ignored for no valid reasons.
7. In defence, different suggestions have been put to the witnesses as committing suicide and also as accidental burning of the deceased by a stove in the kitchen. The defence case of committing suicide was very absurd and most improbable, as it was suggested that she was involved in love affair with his own elder sister's son, Vinod, hence she committed suicide. The same is wholly false and mischievous suggestion, as Vinod was a married man having three children also. This suggestion was straightaway denied by the applicant, PW-1. Contrary to that later a suggestion was given to PW-2 Raj Kumar about her accidental burning by the stove in the kitchen.
8. There could not be any documentary evidence e.g. letter etc., by Smt. Gomti to her brother or her parents as they lived in the same city Kanpur at a distance of 8 km. The deceased was in her sasural in Mohalla Baba Nagar while her brother informant was living in Mohalla Fazalganj and only three months had passed after the marriage.
9. The medical evidence also supported the prosecution version that she was burnt by pouring the kerosene on her body, as her clothes had a clear smell of kerosene, which could not be possible if she had caught fire by a stove.
10. The trial judge has given unnecessary importance to minor contradictions and laid undue and too much importance to the defence evidence even in the presence of the victim's dying declaration.
11. There is a glaring defect in the appraisal of evidence based on misreading of evidence which i
The admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration as the sole basis of conviction, the burden of proof under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, and the elements of dowry death under Section 3....
The court emphasized the necessity of corroborating dying declarations and established that dowry-related cruelty leading to death constitutes an offence under Section 304B IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, and in this case, the evidence did not establish the guilt of the accused ....
The court emphasized proximity between acts of cruelty and death for conviction under S.304B IPC, finding insufficient evidence for such a link while upholding conviction under S.498A IPC.
Dying declarations must be consistent for legal value; inconsistent declarations undermine grounds for conviction under dowry death charges.
Criminal Trial - Offence of Demand of Dowry and Murder - Conviction set aside - case of cruelty on demand of dowry and dowry death, close relatives of deceased are best and natural witness because in....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act in cases of dowry death, and the burden upon the defense to explain the c....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused can be convicted under Section 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act if the prosecution proves that the deceased w....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
