The case revolves around the dowry death mainly and touches upon the other aspect as well.
In today’s era, just fixation of law on a particular dimension of one’s life could be dangerous therefore it is important to look at the other aspects of lives as well as other aspects of law.
The objective of taking up the case is to show how a natural case may be very unnatural and thus, the verdict can be reversed wholly or partly concerning the case.
Facts–
The plaintiff and the dead Chhilo Kaur were married in the year 1993. According to the deceased father he had given enough dowry to the appellant. But after two months the appellant started asking for a motor vehicle, and the deceased father promised that he would buy him when he was able to buy a new one. The deceased has been repeatedly sent to her parental home demanding dowry. Later the family of the appellant also started demanding land.
The allegation was on husband Charan Singh, (the appellant herein), brother-in-law,
Gurmeet Singh and mother-in-law Santo Kaur for murdering the deceased ( wife of Charan Chhilo Kaur) for non-fulfilment of demand of bike and land after marriage.
According to the complainant, he had given sufficient dowry as per his status, despite the alleged family demanding dowry which was informed by the deceased when she came to her parental home.
The complainant got to know about the death of her daughter through Jagir Singh of village Bhogpur Dam, where his daughter lived after marriage
According to the complainant, they cremated the dead body without even informing the complainant i. e parents of the deceased.
Issue raised-
1. The deceased died after 2 years of marriage, is this prerequisite and sufficient to prove the allegation of section 304B and 498A of IPC?
2. Whether the Acquittal of the two accused and the non-acquittal of the husband was a correct decision of the trial court.
3. Whether the decision of H.C. (under Section 304B IPC) to reduce the sentence from ten years to seven years of rigorous imprisonment was correct.
Contention–
Defence-
1. None of the witnesses has stated that there was any harassment or cruelty to the deceased or demand of dowry immediately before her death.
None of the witnesses have affirmed any harassment, cruelty towards the deceased, or a demand for dowry immediately before her death.
2. Jagir Singh, who was named by the complainant in the FIR, has not been produced by the prosecution in evidence is a resident of the village Bhogpur Dam where the deceased lived.
3. Once the ingredients of Sections 304B, 498A IPC, and Section 113B of IEA are not made out, no presumption of dowry death can be raised.
4. The appellant’s wife’s death was not suspicious, as she was suffering from fits.
5. The parents of the deceased were informed that they would not be able to make it in time for the cremation. Despite the presence of the grandmother and two maternal uncles, they did not raise any concerns or notify the police. With the intervention of the panchayat, they took all the dowry articles.
Prosecution-
1. The marriage was merely two years old and the death was unnatural.
2. The deceased was cremated without even informing her parents.
3. The maternal grandmother and the two uncles who were present at the time of cremation had seen injury marks on the body of the deceased and also the broken tooth.
4. They could not lodge a complaint as they were threatened. The death occurred in the matrimonial home, hence onus lies heavily on the appellant to dislodge the presumption.
5. The statement of the witness shows that there was repeated demand for dowry.
Rationale–
Baijnath v. State of M.P (1) the interpretation of Sections 304B and 498A IPC was given in this case.
In the offense of dowry death defined by Section 304-B of the Code, the ingredients
are:
(i) death of the woman concerned is by any burns or bodily injury or by any cause other than
in normal circumstances, and
(ii) is within seven years of her marriage, and
(iii) that soon before her death, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of the husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry.
The offense under Section 498-A of the Code is attracted qua the husband or his relative if she is subjected to cruelty. The Explanation to this Section exposits “cruelty” as:
(i) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb, or health (whether mental or physical), or
(ii) harassment of the woman, where such harassment is to coerce her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
3. Cruelty or harassment of the lady by her husband or his relative in connection with –
a) demand for any property or
b) valuable security as a demand for dowry or in connection herewith is the common constituent of both the offenses.
Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act was also discussed in detail in this case only.
1. The presumption of dowry death is activated only when it is proven that the deceased woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with a demand for dowry by the accused, and that too in a reasonably close time frame. This is a prerequisite mandated by the legislature.
2.When considering these three provisions together, the prosecution must unquestionably prove the elements of the two offenses with direct and convincing evidence in order to apply the presumption outlined in Section 113-B of the Act against the accused.
3. According to Section 304-B of the Code, the accused must have subjected the woman to cruelty in connection with the demand for dowry shortly before her death. This cruelty must be proved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. Only then will the Court presume that the accused has committed the offense of dowry death under Section 113-B of the Act. This presumption arises when it is proven that “soon before her death” she was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with the demand for dowry.
______________________________________________________________
(1). (2017) 1 SCC 101
Judgment- All that is mentioned pertains to the demand for dowry. None of the witnesses, despite living about a kilometer from the deceased and her maternal grandmother, mentioned any cruelty or harassment towards the deceased by the defendant or any of his family members, either on account of dowry demands shortly before her death or at any other time.
It is only certain oral averments regarding the demand for motorcycles and land that were made much before the incident.
Evidence led by the prosecution does not fulfill the pre-requisites to invoke presumption under Section 304B IPC or Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act.
The ingredients of Section 498A IPC are not established, as there is no evidence of cruelty and harassment to the deceased shortly before her passing. Therefore, the conviction of the appellant cannot be justified. The mere unnatural death of the deceased in the matrimonial home within seven years of marriage is not sufficient to convict the accused under Section 304B and 498A IPC. Since the cause of death is unknown, the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 304B, 498A, and 201 IPC cannot be legally sustained.
Defects of law-
The court took the right decision, though what lacunae could be seen easily was even though the witnesses reiterated that the deceased was asked for a motorcycle and land and was sent to her parental home for the fulfillment of it the accused and his family got no punishment. Agreeing to the fact that merely asking someone for something might not be a crime in front of the law but isn’t it is one of the loopholes that can be played with. Why not it was also considered as mental harassment of the deceased. She might have died naturally but the appellant and his family should have not been set free to set a new precedent by the court and to set an example that even asking for dowry could get you in trouble and ultimately lead to punishment provided sufficient evidence are presented before the court depicting asking of dowry.
Inference-
The law has been clear on dowry death cases and there is no ambiguity in it. And it is going to be a precedent for other courts to follow regarding the ingredients of dowry death cases.
Name – Anu Priya
College- LC-1, faculty of law, Delhi University.