AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sabina, J.—Vide this order, CRA No. 317-SB of 1999 and CRR No. 492 of 1999 will be disposed of as these have arisen out of the same judgment.
The appellants were convicted for an offence u/s 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) vide judgment dated 22.3.1999 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala. Vide order dated 23.3.1999 they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. Hence, the present appeal by the appellants. The complainant has filed the revision petition seeking enhancement of sentence.
Prosecution case, as noticed by the trial Court in para No. 3 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:
On 22.7.1996 at about 11.30 a.m. complainant Sanjeev Kumar son of Sham Lal approached the police of Naraingarh and got recorded his statement Ex.PA with Sub Inspector/Station House Officer Phool Kumar on the allegation, briefly, stated, thus:- His sister Abha Rani aged 20 years was married on 9.11.1995 with accused Vinod Kumar son of Sapti Lal resident of village Kathe Majra. The marriage was performed according to the status of the family and dowry was given. On 26.2.1996 at about 5.00 p.m. he had gone to village Kathe Majra to give to his sister some articles (gifts) on the occasion of Holi festival. When he reached there his sister Abha Rani''s mother-in-law namely accused Santosh Rani, Jethani Usha Rani accused, Nanad Shittal accused and husband Vinod Kumar-accused asked him that they had neither given any scooter nor any television nor brought any articles on that occasion of that day also. On that account the accused persons taunted him and his deceased sister Abha Rani. His sister also told him that she was being harassed time and again on account of not bringing scooter and television. Thereafter, the complainant was given food in a separate room and after taking food he slept in that room. When in the morning he got up accused Santosh Rani, mother-in-law of Abha Rani deceased told him that his sister Abha Rani8 had died after drowning in the well. On enquiry by the complainant, accused Santosh Rani did not tell anything as to why she had died. Thereafter, the complainant went to his house at Naraingarh and told his family members about the occurrence. Then he approached the police and lodged FIR that his sister had been thrown into the well on account of harassment and bringing insufficient dowry.
No body has been appearing on behalf of the appellants for the last many dates.
I have gone through the record of the case with the able assistance of the learned State counsel and the learned Counsel for the complainant and am of the opinion that this appeal as well as revision petition deserve to be dismissed.
The present case is yet another case of a dowry death. Abha Rani has died due to drowning within a period of about four months of her marriage.
PW-1 Sanjeev Kumar, brother of deceased Abha Rani, has deposed that his sister was married to appellant Vinod Kumar on 9.11.1995. They had given sufficient dowry including Rs. 31,000/- in cash and other house hold articles at the time of her marriage. The appellants were, however, not satisfied with the dowry given by them and consequently, they started maltreating Abha Rani. On 26.2.1996, he had gone to the in-laws house of his sister Abha Rani at Kathe Majra to give gifts on the occasion of Holi. He had taken clothes for his sister, her mother-in-law and her husband. The appellants were, however, not happy with the said gifts and complained that they had not been given television and scooter at the time of marriage. He returned back home on the next day and at about 6-7.30 a.m. he came to know from appellant Santosh Rani that his sister had died by jumping into the well.
PW-6 Sham Lal, father of deceased Abha Rani, has corroborated the statement of PW-1 Sanjeev Kumar. PW-4 Dr. Ramesh Kumar, who had conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of deceased Abha Rani, deposed that he had conducted the post mortem examination along with Dr. A.K. Gupta and as per their opinion the cause of death in this case was asphyxia as a result of drowning, which was ante mortem in nature.
Section 304B IPC reads as under:
Dowry death: (1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.
Explanation: For the purpose of this sub-section, "dowry" shall have the same meaning as in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961).
(2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.
Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as under:
Presumption as to dowry death: When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman has been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
Explanation:- For the purposes of this section, "dowry death" shall have the same meaning as in Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).
In order to constitute an offence u/s 304B IPC, a death of a woman must have been caused otherwise than under normal circumstances and should have occurred within seven years of her marriage. Soon before her death, the woman must have been subjected to cruelty of harassment by her husband or by relative of her husband and such cruelty must be for or in connection with demand of dowry.
In the present case, deceased Abha Rani has died an unnatural death within few months of her marriage in the house of her in-laws by jumping into the well. From the statements of PW-1 Sanjeev Kumar and PW-6 Sham Lal, it is evident that the deceased was being harassed on account of the demand of dowry/insufficient dowry. When a women marries, she goes to the house of her in-laws with some hope that she would get financial, physical and mental security over there. The deceased must have been forced to take such an extreme step of taking her own life by jumping into the well, by the circumstances surrounding her. In such like cases the statements of relations of the deceased are relevant and significant as they are good witnesses. The brother and father of the deceased have categorically deposed with regard to the harassment meted out to the deceased on account of demand/ insufficient dowry. The statements of the brother and father of the deceased cannot be brushed aside merely because of their relationship with the deceased. Whenever a demand of dowry is made, the girl has to get the same satisfied from her relations. Naturally the relations of the deceased were bound to know about the demand raised by her in-laws. Otherwise also in the natural course of affairs the brother and father of the girl would know whether she is leading a happy married life or not. Since after the death of a girl, the relations between two families are bound to become strained, the statements of the relations of the deceased have, thus, to be acted upon with due care and caution. However, in the present case, the statements of the brother and father of the deceased inspire confidence. They have clearly stated about the harassment meted out to deceased Abha Rani in the matrimonial home on account of insufficient dowry. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court u/s 304B IPC are adequate and call for no interference.
Accordingly, this appeal as well as revision petition are dismissed. Consequently, conviction and sentence of the appellants are maintained u/s 304B IPC.