A conviction for abetment of suicide (S. 306) and dowry death (S. 304B) requires specific proof of mens rea and harassment relating to dowry demands, respectively. Absent evidence of direct instigation or specified dowry-related cruelty, the court may acquit on these charges while maintaining a conviction for general cruelty under S. 498A.

NAFR

CAV Judgment

1. Challenge in this appeal is to the legality and validity of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.1.2008 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge, Balodabazar in ST No.232/2006 whereby accused/appellant stands convicted & sentenced as under:

All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

02. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that marriage of Pramodnibai was solemnized with the accused/appellant on 18.5.2005. On 18.8.2005 at around 4 am she consumed some anti-lice medicine. At that time she was sleeping with the accused/appellant. When she started shivering, her husband/accused called out his parents. When she was asked as to what she consumed, she disclosed nothing. She was taken to the doctor at Pendravan who advised them to take her to Mission Hospital, Sarsiwa. However, she was taken to Primary Health Center, Sarangarh in unconscious condition and admitted there at 7.30 am but during the course of treatment she died at 7.55 am. Information regarding her death was conveyed to her parents and then they reached hospital at Sarangarh at 2 pm. The police was informed about her death. During investigation, inquest over her dead body was performed in presence of witnesses; postmortem of the dead body was conducted which revealed that she was carrying 10-12 weeks pregnancy and statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completing usual investigation charge sheet under Sections 304B /34 and 498A of IPC was filed against the accused persons.

03. Learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 304B , 306 and 498A of IPC against the accused persons, which were denied by them and they prayed for trial. In order to bring home the charges the prosecution examined 10 witnesses in all. Statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 of CrPC wherein they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.

04. After hearing counsel for the respective parties and appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned trial Court while acquitting co-accused Kaushilya, Pukram and Pannalal of all the charges by giving them benefit of doubt, convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned above. Hence this appeal.

05. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and contrary to the material available on record. The FIR was lodged after 8 days of the incident without any explanation therefor. Further, the statement of PW-1 Gajanand is full of exaggeration and omission and likewise, the statement of PW-2 Phoolbai is also not reliable as she stated against the appellant merely on the basis of suspicion. Learned trial Court ought to have appreciated the fact that marriage of the deceased was performed against her will by her parents; there was no ill-treatment or cruelty by the appellant against her; the allegation of dowry is not specific and only general and omnibus allegations have been made. Learned trial Court has failed to appreciate that PW-8 Tahsildar himself admitted in cross-examination that the deceased before attempt to commit suicide had written with Mehandi on her left hand “My Dear Soni I Love You”, which makes it clear that no cruel treatment wa