Back
I (1995) DMC 110
A. Qureshi, R.D. Shukla
State Of M.P.
vs
Shivpujan Singh And Ors.
Decided On : 12 April, 1994
DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT - SECTION 4 - IPC - SECTION 306 - ABETMENT OF SUICIDE - PROOF OF CRUELTY OR HARASSMENT - PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE - APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL - INTERFERENCE BY APPELLATE COURT.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Sharda, was married to the accused, Sukhdeosingh, for three months. During the marriage, the accused and his family demanded a Luna motorcycle as dowry from Sharda's father, Ramadhar Singh. Ramadhar Singh was unable to meet the demand, and the accused and his family allegedly harassed and made sarcastic remarks against Sharda. Sharda sustained 100% burn injuries and died on the spot.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused had consistently harassed or treated Sharda with cruelty, which was the immediate proximate cause of her suicide. The court also noted that the accused were presumed innocent and that the findings of fact by the trial court should not be disturbed unless they were wholly perverse or there had been a miscarriage of justice.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved that the accused had consistently harassed or treated Sharda with cruelty, which was the immediate proximate cause of her suicide. 2. Whether the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused had been weakened by the pronouncement of acquittal. 3. Whether the findings of fact by the trial court should be disturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had failed to prove that the accused had consistently harassed or treated Sharda with cruelty, which was the immediate proximate cause of her suicide. 2. The court held that the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused had not been weakened by the pronouncement of acquittal. 3. The court held that the findings of fact by the trial court should not be disturbed as they were not wholly perverse and there had been no miscarriage of justice.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal against the acquittal of the accused.
R.D. Shukla, J.
1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.8.86 of Xth Addl. Sessions Judge, Indore passed in S.T. No. 69/86 whereby accused-respondents have been acquitted for the offence punishable Under Section 306 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. It is not in dispute that deceased Sharda was married to respondent Sukhdeosingh. Respondent No. 1 Shivpujan Singh is the father of Sukhdeosingh and respondent No. 2 Ramdulari in his mother. P.W.1 Ramdharsingh and P.W. 2 Shantibai are father and mother respectively of deceased Shardabai. Ramdharsingh was working in 24th Battalion of SAF. This marriage took place on 28.4.84, Dowry nearly worth Rs. 10,000/- was given and list Ex. P/2 was prepared. Sharda sustained 100% burn-injuries in the morning of 21.7.84. She died on the spot. It is alleged that during marriage accused Sukhdeosingh with the active connivance of accused. Shivpujan Singh and Shivpujan Singh demanded Luna from Ramadhar Singh. Ramadhar Singh was not in a position to meet the demand. As such they did not take food in the house of Ramadhar. However, bride Sharda was sent alongwith them. It is also alleged that sarcastic remarks were made against Sharda and she was being harassed as the demand of Luna was not fulfilled. She was also pressurised for bringing Luna from her father. Harassed with unpalatable remarks from the in-laws and husband she committed suicide.
3. An intimation for the same was given by the neighbours to the police. The police took charge of the body; prepared inquest report and sent the body for post-mortem examination.
4. Autopsy on the body of deceased Sharda was conducted by P.W. 9 Dr. A.S. Vishnar who has opined that the burns were antemortem in nature and Sharda died of shock due to 100% burns (vide Ex. P/6).
5. After usual investigation challan against accused persons was filed and the same was committed to the Court of Sessions in due course. Accused persons abjured the guilt and pleaded innocence.
6. After trial learned Judge has acquitted all the accused-respondents. Hence this appeal by the State against acquittal.
7. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant State is that body with 100% burns was found inside the house and therefore, burden lies on the accused persons especially on Sukhdeo Singh husband of Sharda to explain as to how Sharda sustained burn-injuries.
8. As against it learned Counsel for accused-respondents has submitted that no fact of cruelty or harassment immediately before the alleged suicide was proved. If has also been submitted that the case is of accidental burns.
9. It may be observed at the outset that none of the persons residing in the neighbourhood have supported the case of the prosecution. It appears that the case has proceeded with half-hearted investigation. Ex. P/8 site-map and Ex. P. 10 inquest Report does not indicate as to whether there was any smell of Kerosene in the body of deceased or whether any object leading to suicide was found near the body.
10. No effect was made to obtain the opinion of the Doctor as to whether the death was homicidal or not.
11. P.W. 1 Ramadhar Singh and P.W. 2 Shantibai have stated about the demand of Luna by accused Sukhdeo Singh and his father Shivpujan Singh who were present in the bridegroom party. That fact has been corroborated by Ramnath Oza (P.W. 3) and Sachchitanand (P.W. 8) though certain omissions have been suggested but those are not very material. From the evidence of these three witnesses and P.W. 8 Sachchita Nand it is proved that there was a demand of Luna by accused Sukhdeo Singh in connivance with his father Shivpujan Singh and that could not be fulfilled by Ramdhar Singh.
12. But there is no clear and cogent evidence to show as to whether harassment was caused to the deceased, for that reason. As against it the evidence was come that Shivpujan Singh has celebrated the marriage of his son, no persons from the neighbourhood has stated about the cruelty having
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
