IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment establishes that for a conviction under Section 304B IPC, it must be shown that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands shortly before her death, and that the presumption of guilt applies when a woman dies under suspicious circumstances within seven years of marriage.

JUDGMENT :

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J.

1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 09.03.2022, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Aligarh in Sessions Trial No. 297 of 2017 (State Vs. Ankur Gupta and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 1064 of 2016, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh, whereby the accused appellants Ankur Gupta (husband of deceased) and Smt. Vimlesh (mother-in-law of deceased) have been convicted under Section 304B IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment; under Section 498A IPC for two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/-each and in default of payment of fine they are to further undergo six months additional imprisonment and; under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act for one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-each and in default thereof they are to further undergo three months additional imprisonment. All sentences are to run concurrently.

2. The informant Umesh Chandra (PW-1), who is the father of deceased, has made a written report (Ex.Ka.1), scribed by Pradeep Nath Sharma (not produced in trial), to the Station House Officer, Police Station Quarsi, informing that he is resident of District Budaun and had married his daughter Shreya Varshaney (deceased) to accused appellant Ankur Gupta with Hindu customs and traditions on 06.03.2013 and had spent nearly Rs.10 lac for the purposes. Ever since the marriage in-laws of his daughter were demanding additional dowry. On several occasions he met the demands and persuaded his daughter to stay with her in-laws. On 26-27.10.2016 the deceased informed informant on phone that accused Ankur requires Rs.5 lac for establishing factory. If such amount is not given before Deepawali, her mother-in-law, husband and sister-in-law (Nanad) would kill her for dowry. The incident occurred on 29.10.2018 in the morning hours. Informant’s brother-in-law Girish intimated him that deceased has been strangulated to death by her mother-in-law Vimlesh, husband Ankur and sister-in-law Swati @ Sona and thereafter set her ablaze. Request was made for lodging First Information Report and taking appropriate legal action.

3. Based upon the aforesaid written report (Ex.Ka-1) the First Information Report (Ex.Ka.11) was lodged on 29.10.2016 at 07.20 pm as Case Crime No. 1064 of 2016 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against three accused Ankur Gupta (husband), Smt. Vimlesh (mother-in-law) and Swati @ Sona (sister-in-law). Investigation proceeded. The Investigating Officer recovered a ring having thread (kalawa) and a blue cane on which Artele was mentioned and there was smell of kerosene. This recovery has been exhibited as Ex.Ka.4. The inquest (Ex.Ka.5) was conducted and the inquest witnesses found that the deceased died due to burn injuries and her tongue had protruded. The death apparently occurred due to burn injuries but in the opinion of inquest witnesses postmortem was required to be conducted to ascertain the cause of death. The dead body was accordingly sealed and sent for postmortem. The postmortem (Ex.Ka.7) was conducted on 30.10.2016 at 12.15 and the Autopsy Surgeon noted following conditions of the body:

“Age: 31 years

General Examination: Average body built, pugilistic attitude present, both eyes closed, tongue protruded.

External Examination/Antemortem Injuries:

Superficial to deep thermal burn injury present all over the body except both foot sole and some part of scalp. Singing of hairs (scalp) present. Line of redness present at places. Smell of kerosene oil present. About 95& thermal burn injury. Exudate present at places.

Time of death: Expired about one day back.

Cause of death: Due to asphyxia with hypovolumic shock as a result of antemortem thermal burn injury.”

4. The Investigating Officer, after recording the statement of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and collecting other evidence etc., concluded the investigation and submitted a ch