Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.
Ram Saran and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.306 of 1996
Decided on : 04-01-2024.
Indian Penal Code - Sections 304B and 498A - Dowry death - Conviction of appellants under Sections 304B IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act set aside due to lack of evidence of cruelty or harassment soon before death - Prosecution failed to prove demand of dowry or connection with death - Appeal allowed. (Paras 11, 12, 25)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the dowry death of Vimla Devi, who died under suspicious circumstances shortly after her marriage. The prosecution alleged that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment for dowry. However, the evidence presented was found insufficient to establish a direct link between the alleged dowry demands and her death.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment soon before her death, which is essential to invoke the presumption under Section 304B IPC.
Issues: The main issues addressed were whether the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands soon before her death and whether the prosecution's evidence was credible.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's evidence did not establish the necessary elements of Sections 304B and 498A IPC, particularly the requirement of cruelty or harassment soon before death, leading to the conclusion that the conviction was unjustified.
Result: Appeal allowed; conviction set aside.
JUDGMENT :
Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. - Since the appellant No.2-Guru Dayal and appellant No.3-Bitoli have died hence the appeal stands dismissed as abated in relation to appellant Nos.2 and 3.
2. Heard Sri. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. Alok Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.
3. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30.07.1996 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hardoi in Sessions Trial No. 151 of 1994, arising out of Case Crime No.589 of 1993, Police Station Kotwali City, Hardoi whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Appellant No.1-Ram Saran have been sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 304B IPC and appellant No.2-Guru Dayal as well as appellant No.3-Smt. Bitoli have been sentenced to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 304B IPC. All the three accused-appellants have also been sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2,000/- for offence under section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and in default of making payment of fine, they would further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.
4. Prosecution case is that a written report was given by the informant Kalawati alleging that she married her daughter Vimla Devi two and a half years ago with appellant No.1-Ram Saran. Immediately after the marriage, her in-laws used to beat her and demanded scooter, fridge and other costly items. Her daughter often used to tell these incidents to her and her family members. In the last month my daughter was residing with me to escape from the harassment of her in-laws. Yesterday on 24.09.1993, her father-in-law Guru Dayal took her after farewell (vidayi) and told that he will take her to Kanhaipurwa. There is difficulty at home regarding cooking and other day to day work. Believing it, I did her farewell on the same day.
Today on 25.09.1993 in the morning Ram Dayal came at 08:00 am and told that her daughter has been done to death by pouring kerosene oil by appellant No.1-Ram Saran, her mother-in-law and father-in-law Guru Dayal. He told that Kushiram, Jageshwar and others have taken her to hospital on scooter. The daughter of the informant often used to object when they served liquor to Bhagwandeen at home as he was a goonda type person. When the informant came there, she came to know that in the night both husband and father-in-law of the deceased consumed excessive liquor at home. She came around 09:30 am today at the hospital and came to know everything. She found her daughter dead. She was not capable to give dowry and because of not giving dowry her daughter's husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law have burnt her daughter by pouring kerosene oil. While her daughter was burning, Om Prakash, Raghubar Dayal and Bhim Sen resident of Kanhaipurwa have seen the incident. The written report was given to the Superintendent of Police, Hardoi, Ex.ka-1 and he marked it to the S.H.O. Kotwali City and consequently, chik F.I.R. No.806 dated 25.09.1993, 16:20 hours, P.S. Kotwali City was registered which is Ex.Ka-13. The brief information about the incident has been mentioned in the general diary Rapat No.45 dated 25.09.1993 at 16:20 hours Ex.ka-14.
5. According to the prosecution and the documents of the hospital accused Guru Dayal father-in-law of the deceased informed that he brought his daughter-in-law on 24.09.1993 to home where she did not want to reside with appellants and today in the morning around 04:00 o'clock she poured kerosene oil upon her and set her on fire. The information to this effect was given in the police station which has been recorded in general diary Rapat No.8 dated 25.09.1993 at 06:50 am, Ex.ka-16. The Emergency Medical Officer, Hardoi on 25.09.1993 sent the information to the Prabhari Nirikshak, Kotwali City, Hardoi that deceased Vimla has been admitted on account of burn injury
The prosecution must prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands soon before her death to establish a case under Sections 304B and 498A IPC.
The prosecution must prove that the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands soon before her death to establish a case under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC.
The prosecution failed to prove essential elements of dowry death, leading to acquittal of most accused, while confirming conviction of mother-in-law under Section 498-A IPC.
Point of law : Dowry death - Conviction set aside - Articles, said to be demanded, are not such for which present appellants can be direct beneficiaries. Moreover, evidence on the above point is not ....
The judgment establishes the application of key legal provisions such as Section 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and the presumption under Section 113B....
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 304-B IPC, establishing that the deceased was subjected to cruelty for dowry demands, leading to her suicide, thus satisfying the legal requirements fo....
The prosecution must prove demand for dowry and cruelty to establish a dowry death under Section 304B IPC, leading to a presumption of guilt against the accused.
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
