Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(All) 2230

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.
Ram Saran and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 306 of 1996
Decided On : 04-01-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Pankaj Gupta, Mohd. Kamal Khan, Vijay Kumar

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.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 304-B and 498-A - Dowry Prohibition Act - Section 4 - Conviction of appellants for dowry death and cruelty - The court found insufficient evidence of demand for dowry or cruelty soon before the death of the victim, leading to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 12, 26)

(B) Evidence - Presumption of dowry death - The court emphasized that the presumption under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act cannot be invoked without evidence of cruelty or harassment soon before death. (Paras 12, 26)

Facts of the case:
The victim, Vimla Devi, was married to appellant Ram Saran and died under suspicious circumstances shortly after returning to her in-laws' home. The prosecution alleged dowry demands and cruelty, but evidence was inconsistent and lacked proximity to the death.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the necessary elements of dowry death and cruelty, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.

Issues: The main issues included whether there was sufficient evidence of dowry demands and cruelty soon before the victim's death.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to establish that the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands immediately before her death.

Result: Appeal allowed; conviction set aside.

JUDGMENT :

KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

1. 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 498-A, 304-B 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 304-B 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 304-B 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