Back
2018 Supreme(MP) 156
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
S.K. SETH, ANURAG SHRIVASTAVA, JJ.
Pushpendra, S/o Aditya Prasad Pandey - Appellant
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh through Police Station Mada, District Singrauli (M.P.) - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 978, 982 of 2015
Decided On : 01-03-2018
For the Appellant :Shri S.C. Datt, Senior Advocate with Shri Siddharth Datt, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Shri S.K. Rai, Government Advocate.
The burden of proof shifted to the accused to prove that the death was either natural or accidental, and the court ultimately acquitted the accused persons of the charge of dowry death under Section 304-B but affirmed their conviction under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Headnote:
DOWRY DEATH - Criminal Appeal Nos. 978/2015 and 982/2015 - Section 304-B, 498-A of IPC, Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act - Section 304-B, 498-A, 113-B of Evidence Act - The court discussed the evidence and found that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry by the accused persons. The court also discussed the legal provisions of Section 304-B, 498-A of IPC, and Section 113-B of the Evidence Act, and how the burden of proof shifted to the accused to prove that the death was either natural or accidental. The court ultimately acquitted the accused persons of the charge of dowry death under Section 304-B but affirmed their conviction under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased was married and subsequently subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry by the accused persons. She made repeated complaints to her family about the mistreatment. The accused persons denied the allegations and claimed that the deceased's death was accidental.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry by the accused persons, leading to her death. The court acquitted the accused persons of the charge of dowry death under Section 304-B but affirmed their conviction under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Issues: The main issue was whether the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry by the accused persons, and whether the death was accidental or a result of the cruelty and harassment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for demand of dowry by the accused persons, and the burden of proof shifted to the accused to prove that the death was either natural or accidental. The court ultimately acquitted the accused persons of the charge of dowry death under Section 304-B but affirmed their conviction under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the accused persons of the charge of dowry death under Section 304-B but affirmed their conviction under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
ANURAG SHRIVASTAVA, J.
1. By this common judgment both the Criminal Appeal Nos. 978/2015 and 982/2015 are being decided.
2. The Criminal Appeal No.978/2015 under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. has been preferred by appellants/accused persons against the judgment and conviction dated 24.03.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge Singrauli (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.318/2010, whereby the each appellants No.1, 3 & 4 have been convicted for offences punishable under Section 304-B and 498-A of IPC and awarded the sentence in graver offence Section 304-B of IPC, R.I. for seven years and also convicted under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced to R.I. for two years and fine of Rs.1,000/-. Appellant No.2 Ku. Jyoti has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC and awarded sentence of R.I for three years and fine of Rs.1,000/-and convicted under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and awarded sentence of R.I. for two years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulations.
3. In Criminal Appeal No.982/2015 under Section 378(1) of Cr.P.C. complainant Anjani Prasad Pandey challenged the acquittal of Ku. Jyoti under Section 304-B of IPC and also prayed for enhancement of sentence inflicted by trial Court on respondents/accused persons.
4. The case of prosecution in brief is that the marriage of deceased Shashi Pandey was solemnized with accused Pushpendra on 23.06.2007. Other accused Aditya Pandey and Smt. Ratan Kumari are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased and Ku. Jyoti is her sister-in-law. Prior to marriage, at the time of Tilak ceremony (engagement) on 20.06.2007 father of deceased namely Anjani Kumar Pandey had given Rs.1,11,551/- as customary gift to accused Pushpendra. Being dissatisfied with the above amount, Aditya Prasad Pandey made a demand of Rs.3,00,000/- and a Maruti car as dowry and threatened to break marriage if the demand is not meted out. As the father of deceased Anjani Pandey was not inclined to satisfy the demand he refused to marry his daughter with Pushpendra. A dispute arose there wherein relatives of both parties intervened and on their conciliation, Aditya Pandey agreed to marry his son without taking dowry. Thereafter, marriage was consummated on 23.06.2007 and deceased went to her marital home at village Kathura.
5. As per prosecution when deceased arrived at her marital home, her husband Pushpendra told her that your father had promised to give Rs.3,00,000/- and a Maruti car in dowry but gave only Rs.1,11,551/-. Therefore, next time when she will come to her marital home, she should bring the remaining part of money and maruti car from her father. Deceased tried to object against this demand, then Pushpendra beaten her. Other accused persons Aditya Pandey, Smt. Ratan Kumari, Ku. Jyoti also asked the deceased to fulfill the demand of dowry as mentioned above. The accused persons used to beat and harass the deceased for demand of dowry. The deceased informed her sister Shimla Pandey and brother Om Prakash who came after a week to take her back to her parental house. The deceased came to her parental house and stayed there for a week, then again went to her marital home and stayed there for twenty days. She informed to her parents and other family members that she was repeatedly harassed and beaten by the accused persons for demand of dowry. Till the month of February, 2008, the deceased visited her parental house 3-4 times and on each occasion, she made complaint of cruelty and harassment meted out to her by accused persons for demand of dowry. In the first week of February, 2008 Pushpendra fell ill and hospitalized in Nehru Hospital Jayant for ten days. During this period, the deceased remained in hospital and looked after her husband. Thereafter, Pushpendra and deceased went to village Kathura on 17th February where deceased lived in her marital house till her death. During this period also deceased was subjected to cruelty by the accused persons for demand of
