Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
Phulel Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Harayana – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 396 of 2010
Decided On : 27-09-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 304-B – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32(1) – Dowry death – Conviction and sentence – Present case mainly rests on dying declaration of deceased – Conviction can be solely recorded on the basis of dying declaration – However, for doing so, court must come to a conclusion that dying declaration is trustworthy, reliable and one which inspires confidence – In present case, there is a grave doubt as to whether dying declaration recorded by Executive Magistrate was a voluntary one or tutored – It cannot be said that dying declaration is free from doubt – Insofar as harassment with regard to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry is concerned, except vague allegation, there is nothing in their evidence to support prosecution case – There is no evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that deceased was harassed on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry – Case under Section 304-B of IPC is not made out by prosecution – Appellant acquitted of all charges levelled against him. (Paras 10, 12, 14, 17 and 18)
Facts of the case:
Vide impugned Judgment, High Court upheld conviction and sentence qua appellant for offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC and appeal challenging acquittal of accused persons for the charge under Section 302 of IPC were dismissed.
Findings of Court:
Judgment and order of conviction as recorded by trial court dated 14th September 1999 and affirmed by High Court vide its impugned judgment and order dated 24th July 2009 are quashed and set aside.
Result : Appeal allowed. Appellant acquitted.
JUDGMENT :
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 24th July 2009 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal Nos. 413-DBA of 2001 and 909-SB of 1999 along with Criminal Revision No. 134 of 2000, wherein the Division Bench partly allowed the appeal filed by the accused persons; whereby Jora Singh (Accused No. 1), father of the appellant herein was acquitted of the charge under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC” for short) and the conviction and sentence qua the appellant herein rendered by the learned court of Mrs. Nirmal Yadav, Sessions Judge, Sirsa (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”) in Sessions Trial No. 122 of 1994 vide judgment and order dated 14th September 1999 for the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years was upheld. Whereas, Criminal Appeal No. 413-DBA of 2001 filed by the State of Haryana and Criminal Revision No. 134 of 2000 filed by Pavitar Singh (PW-3), brother of Kiran Kaur (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”) challenging the acquittal of the accused persons for the charge under Section 302 of IPC were dismissed.
2. Shorn of details, the facts leading to the present appeal, are as under:
2.1 The marriage between the deceased and the appellant was solemnized in March, 1987, and they were blessed with a girl and a boy. It is the prosecution case that the appellant used to harass the deceased on account of insufficiency of dowry. It is further the prosecution case that, succumbing to the demands of the appellant, the parents of the deceased paid Rs. 20,000/- to the appellant in cash and in 1990, they gave a scooter and gold ornaments weighing 2.5-3 tolas to the appellant. Further, the deceased would tell her parents and her brother about the harassment and ill-treatment meted out to her at the hands of the appellant whenever she visited her parental house and eventually refused to reside in the house of the appellant. However, on account of the assurance and responsibility undertaken by Mohan Singh, the son-in-law of Jora Singh, father-in-law of the deceased, she was brought back to her matrimonial house. Even then, the deceased was not treated properly by the appellant. According to the prosecution allegations, Pavitar Singh (PW-3), brother of the deceased had come to see the deceased at her matrimonial home in village Chatha about 3 to 4 days prior to the Diwali of 1991 when the deceased had informed him about the demand for dowry being made by the appellant and his family. When Pavitar Singh (PW-3) returned home and informed his parents about the said harassment being meted out to the deceased in lieu of demand for dowry, Randhir Singh (PW-4), father of the deceased, went to Major Singh (PW-6), Sarpanch of his village, who assured him that they would go to the house of the appellant for counselling them after Diwali. Following which, on 5th November 1991, i.e. on the festive day of Diwali, Dr. Sharma of Bhagwangarh had come to Rama Mandi. On his return, he informed Pavitar Singh (PW-3) and other family members that the deceased had been burnt and that she was being taken to Ludhiana. Thereupon, Pavitar Singh (PW-3), Randhir Singh (PW-4) and cousin Gur Raj Singh reached the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as “DMC Ludhiana”) where the deceased was admitted and lay unconscious. On 5th November 1991, Dr. Jasmeet Singh Dhir (PW-7), the Medical Officer at DMC, Ludhiana, who had medico-legally examined the deceased, opined that she had 91% burns on her body and accordingly sent ruqa (Ex.P.J) to the Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana on the same day at about 05.10 p.m. regarding admission of the deceased in the hospital.
2.2 On 7th November 2011, when the deceased regained consciousness, she told Pavitar Singh (PW-3) and others that it was the appellan
Dowry death – Conviction can be solely recorded on the basis of dying declaration – However, for doing so, court must come to a conclusion that dying declaration is trustworthy, reliable and one whic....
Dying declarations must be consistent for legal value; inconsistent declarations undermine grounds for conviction under dowry death charges.
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the essential elements of dowry death, including the timing of the marriage and the link between dowry demands and the death, as well as the decease....
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if proven credible, establishing link between dowry demands and resulting harassment leading to the victim's death.
Conviction under Section 498-A requires clear evidence of cruelty related to dowry demands; a dying declaration indicating accidental death denies such evidence.
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that a woman was subjected to cruelty for dowry demand to establish a case of dowry death under IPC Section 304-B.
(1) Dying declaration – While conviction can be solely based on a dying declaration, court still has to weigh the same in light of surrounding circumstances and with reference to principles governing....
Dowry Death - Dying declaration - Conviction can be based on dying declaration alone without corroboration if the court finds the dying declaration trust-worthy and genuine.
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
