Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAJIV GUPTA, VIKAS BUDHWAR, JJ.
State of U.P. - Appellant
Versus
Manish Kumar And Another - Respondents
Government Appeal No.1062 of 2024, CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 372 CR.P.C. No. - 254 of 2023
Decided on : 21-02-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 498A, 304B, 302 - Dowry Prohibition Act - Section 4 - Acquittal of accused in dowry death case - Prosecution failed to prove demand of dowry and cruelty against accused - Trial court's acquittal upheld as no compelling reasons to interfere - The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof on the prosecution. (Paras 15, 16, 41, 47)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 372 - Appeal against acquittal - The appellate court must exercise caution and not disturb acquittal unless the trial court's findings are perverse or unsustainable. (Paras 16, 18)
Facts of the case:
The informant alleged that his daughter was subjected to dowry demands and cruelty by her in-laws, leading to her death shortly after marriage. The trial court acquitted the accused due to lack of evidence supporting the claims. (Paras 2-5)
Findings of Court:
The trial court found no evidence of dowry demands or cruelty, leading to the acquittal of the accused. The appellate court concurred with this finding. (Paras 47, 49)
Issues: The main issues were whether the prosecution proved the demand for dowry and whether the accused were guilty of causing the victim's death. (Paras 15, 41)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution failed to establish the essential elements of dowry death under Section 304B IPC, and the trial court's findings were plausible and based on the evidence presented. (Paras 41, 47)
Result: Appeals rejected.
JUDGMENT :
(Per: Hon’ble Vikas Budhwar, J.)
1. Impugned in the present proceedings by way of Government Appeal No. 1062 of 2024 at the instance of State of U.P. and Appeal Under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. No. 254 of 2023, preferred by Ashok Kumar (Informant) is the judgment and the order dated 2.3.2023 passed by the court of Session Judge, Auraiya in Sessions Trial No. 174 of 2018, State vs. Manoj Kumar and others arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 304B, 302 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Sahayal, District Auraiya acquitting the accused respondents.
Facts
2. The prosecution theory in brief is that on 20.3.2017, Ashok Kumar (first informant), lodged a first information report in Police Station Sahayal, District Auraiya alleging that his daughter Neeta (victim) solemnized marriage on 29.1.2016 with the accused (A-1), Manish Kumar, son of Brij Kishore Pal, resident of village Gadhaiya, Police Station Sahayal, District Auraiya . It is further alleged that gifts were offered to the groomside as per his status. However, the accused, (A-1) Manish Kumar, his father Brij Kishore Pal, father-in-law of the deceased (victim), accused (A-2) Rajeshwari, mother-in-law of the deceased (victim) and sister-in-law Manu used to demand dowry in the shape of a four-wheeler and amount of Rs.1,00,000/- which according to them was to be tendered since the gifts and the offerings so made by the bridegroom side was thoroughly insufficient. On account of non-fulfilment of the said demand, atrocities were sought to be made upon the deceased (victim). The said fact was even apprised to the first informant and his family whenever the deceased (victim) met her maternal family members.
3. A first information report came to be lodged in Police Station, Mangalpur, Kanpur Dehat on 22.6.2017 being FIR No.265/2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and thereafter, on an advice being tendered to them not to repeat the said act but they continued to demand dowry and maltreat the victim. On 19.03.2018, the accused (A-1), Manish Kumar informed the brother of the first informant, Brijesh Kumar that the deceased (victim) had consumed poison on account whereof the victim was taken for medical treatment, however, she died. On the receipt of the said information, the first informant along with his family members and villagers came to the matrimonial house of the victim where they found that the body was lying outside the house of the accused, they were absconding and the house was locked.
4. A first information report came to be lodged on 20.03.2018 at 0020 hours which was registered as Case Crime No.75 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the accused (A-1) Manish Kumar, Brij Kishore Pal, (A-2) Rajeshwari and Manu. The first information report was registered by Head Constable, Sobran Singh and the inquest was also prepared in the presence of PW-4 Premchand Pandey, the Naib Tehsildar. The corpus of the deceased was sent for postmortem and the postmortem was conducted by Dr. Subodh Kumar. PW-6 Bandana Singh, Circle Officer was appointed as the Investigating Officer to conduct investigation. The necessary formalities with respect to preparation of the site plan was also undertaken and the statement of the PW-1 Ashok Kumar (father of the deceased), PW-2 Arun Kumar, (uncle of the deceased) and PW3, Rita, maternal sister-in-law of the deceased was also recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. The Investigating Officer conducted the investigation and submitted the charge sheet, under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC, read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act accused A1, Manish Kumar, A2, Rajeshwari and Brij Kishore Pal whereas Ms. Manu was exonerated from the charges. Thereafter cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.
5. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses namely, Asho
The prosecution must prove dowry demands and cruelty beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under Sections 498A and 304B IPC; mere allegations are insufficient.
In dowry death cases, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused subjected the victim to cruelty related to dowry demands before her death, maintaining the presumption of inn....
Point of Law : Prosecution has failed to prove the guilt against the accused. [Para 39]
Point of Law : If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.
To convict under Section 304B IPC, evidence of specific instances of cruelty or harassment connected with dowry demands must be established; otherwise, lesser offences may be considered.
The court upheld that the prosecution failed to establish key elements of dowry harassment and death within seven years, maintaining the presumption of innocence for the accused.
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
