As per case facts, Gurmeet Kaur, married to appellant Jaspal Singh, allegedly faced harassment from her in-laws for dowry, specifically a scooter, as stated by her brother. She died by ...
CRA-S-1752
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Whether only operative part of the judgment is
Whether full judgment is pronounced:
JIT KAUR & OTHERS
STATE OF PUNJAB
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL
Present:
RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J
1.
order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Sangrur, in FIR No. 122 dated 03.05.2003 registered under Sections 304
and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at P
Sangrur, whereby the appellants were convicted under Section 304
and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years
along with fine of
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 1 of 23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRA-S- 1752
Reserved on:
Pronounced on:
Uploaded on:
Whether only operative part of the judgment is Pronounced
full judgment is pronounced: Yes
IT KAUR & OTHERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL
Mr. Ashok Singla, Advocate
for the appellants no. 1 and 2.
Mr. Ruhani Chadha, Advocate
For appellant no. 3.
Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab.
*****
RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J.
The present appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Sangrur, in FIR No. 122 dated 03.05.2003 registered under Sections 304
A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at P
Sangrur, whereby the appellants were convicted under Section 304
and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years
along with fine of ₹2,000/- each and, in default of payment of fine, to further
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Reserved on: 11.03.2026
Pronounced on: 29.05.2026
Uploaded on: 29.05.2026
Pronounced : No
....Appellants
....Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL
Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab.
The present appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Sangrur, in FIR No. 122 dated 03.05.2003 registered under Sections 304-B
A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Dhuri, District
Sangrur, whereby the appellants were convicted under Section 304-B IPC
and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years
each and, in default of payment of fine, to further
The present appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
B
olice Station Dhuri, District
B IPC
and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years
each and, in default of payment of fine, to further
CRA-S-1752
undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. The appellants were
also convicted under Section 498
imprisonment for one year each. Both the sentences were ordered to run
concurrently.
2.
registered on the statement of complainant Manjeet Singh, brother of
deceased Gurmeet Kaur.
2.1.
no.2 Jaspal Singh on 17.03.2002. At the time of marriage,
articles were allegedly given according to the financial capacity of the
parental family of the deceased and a further amount of
allegedly paid on the occasion of the reception ceremony.
2.2.
persons (appellants herein)
(mother-in-law) and Seema Rani (sister
maltreating the deceased on account of insufficient dowry and raised a
demand for a scooter. The deceased is stated to have informed her parental
family on various occasions regarding the said harassment.
2.3.
half months prior to the occurrence, both families had attended a marriage
where substantial dowry had allegedly been given and t
again taunted the deceased for not bringing adequate dowry and reiterated
their demand for a scooter.
2.4.
to her death, the deceased delivered a female child and whi
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 2 of 23
ergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. The appellants were
also convicted under Section 498-A IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one year each. Both the sentences were ordered to run
concurrently.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that the FIR in question was
registered on the statement of complainant Manjeet Singh, brother of
deceased Gurmeet Kaur.
As per the prosecution, Gurmeet Kaur was married to appellant
Jaspal Singh on 17.03.2002. At the time of marriage,
articles were allegedly given according to the financial capacity of the
parental family of the deceased and a further amount of
allegedly paid on the occasion of the reception ceremony.
It is alleged that after a few months of marriage, the accused
(appellants herein) namely Jaspal Singh (husband), Jeet Kaur
law) and Seema Rani (sister-
maltreating the deceased on account of insufficient dowry and raised a
demand for a scooter. The deceased is stated to have informed her parental
family on various occasions regarding the said harassment.
The prosecution further alleged that approximately two and a
half months prior to the occurrence, both families had attended a marriage
where substantial dowry had allegedly been given and t
again taunted the deceased for not bringing adequate dowry and reiterated
their demand for a scooter.
It is further the case of the prosecution that about 22 days prior
to her death, the deceased delivered a female child and whi
ergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. The appellants were
A IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one year each. Both the sentences were ordered to run
brief, is that the FIR in question was
registered on the statement of complainant Manjeet Singh, brother of
As per the prosecution, Gurmeet Kaur was married to appellant
Jaspal Singh on 17.03.2002. At the time of marriage, sufficient dowry
articles were allegedly given according to the financial capacity of the
parental family of the deceased and a further amount of ₹25,000/- was
allegedly paid on the occasion of the reception ceremony.
months of marriage, the accused
namely Jaspal Singh (husband), Jeet Kaur
-in-law) started harassing and
maltreating the deceased on account of insufficient dowry and raised a
demand for a scooter. The deceased is stated to have informed her parental
family on various occasions regarding the said harassment.
The prosecution further alleged that approximately two and a
half months prior to the occurrence, both families had attended a marriage
where substantial dowry had allegedly been given and thereafter the accused
again taunted the deceased for not bringing adequate dowry and reiterated
It is further the case of the prosecution that about 22 days prior
to her death, the deceased delivered a female child and while admitted in the
ergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. The appellants were
A IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one year each. Both the sentences were ordered to run
brief, is that the FIR in question was
registered on the statement of complainant Manjeet Singh, brother of
As per the prosecution, Gurmeet Kaur was married to appellant
sufficient dowry
articles were allegedly given according to the financial capacity of the
was
months of marriage, the accused
namely Jaspal Singh (husband), Jeet Kaur
law) started harassing and
maltreating the deceased on account of insufficient dowry and raised a
demand for a scooter. The deceased is stated to have informed her parental
The prosecution further alleged that approximately two and a
half months prior to the occurrence, both families had attended a marriage
hereafter the accused
again taunted the deceased for not bringing adequate dowry and reiterated
It is further the case of the prosecution that about 22 days prior
le admitted in the
CRA-S-1752
hospital at Sangrur, she again disclosed to her mother and brother that she
was being harassed on account of dowry demands.
2.5.
Kaur was received by the complainant party. It wa
to bear the continuous harassment and cruelty at the hands of the accused
persons, the deceased consumed poisonous substance and died.
2.6.
persons.
3.
Dr. R.P. Jindal, PW
Satwinder Singh, PW
Singh, PW-7 Jagdev Sharma, PW
Singh.
4.
the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein all
the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution
evidence were put to them.
4.1.
levelled by the prosecution and pleaded false implication and examined
DW-1 Gurinder Singh and DW
any demand for dowry had ever been raised or that the
subjected to harassment or cruelty on account thereof. The defence taken by
the accused was that the deceased was treated properly in her matrimonial
home and that she remained under mental stress after giving birth to a
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 3 of 23
hospital at Sangrur, she again disclosed to her mother and brother that she
was being harassed on account of dowry demands.
On 03.05.2003, information regarding the death of Gurmeet
Kaur was received by the complainant party. It wa
to bear the continuous harassment and cruelty at the hands of the accused
persons, the deceased consumed poisonous substance and died.
After investigation, challan was presented against the accused
In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined PW
Dr. R.P. Jindal, PW-2 Manjeet Singh, PW
Satwinder Singh, PW-5 Constable Jagtar Singh, PW
7 Jagdev Sharma, PW-8 ASI Balbir Chand and PW
After the closure of the prosecution evidence, the statements of
the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein all
the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution
evidence were put to them.
The accused (appellants herein)
levelled by the prosecution and pleaded false implication and examined
Gurinder Singh and DW-2 Inder Singh.
any demand for dowry had ever been raised or that the
subjected to harassment or cruelty on account thereof. The defence taken by
the accused was that the deceased was treated properly in her matrimonial
home and that she remained under mental stress after giving birth to a
hospital at Sangrur, she again disclosed to her mother and brother that she
was being harassed on account of dowry demands.
On 03.05.2003, information regarding the death of Gurmeet
Kaur was received by the complainant party. It was alleged that being unable
to bear the continuous harassment and cruelty at the hands of the accused
persons, the deceased consumed poisonous substance and died.
After investigation, challan was presented against the accused
substantiate its case, the prosecution examined PW-1
2 Manjeet Singh, PW-3 Jeet Kaur, PW-4 MHC
5 Constable Jagtar Singh, PW-6 DSP Gurbachan
8 ASI Balbir Chand and PW-9 SI Kulwant
After the closure of the prosecution evidence, the statements of
the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein all
the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution
(appellants herein) denied all the allegations
levelled by the prosecution and pleaded false implication and examined
2 Inder Singh. It was specifically denied that
any demand for dowry had ever been raised or that the deceased had been
subjected to harassment or cruelty on account thereof. The defence taken by
the accused was that the deceased was treated properly in her matrimonial
home and that she remained under mental stress after giving birth to a
hospital at Sangrur, she again disclosed to her mother and brother that she
On 03.05.2003, information regarding the death of Gurmeet
s alleged that being unable
to bear the continuous harassment and cruelty at the hands of the accused
After investigation, challan was presented against the accused
1
4 MHC
6 DSP Gurbachan
9 SI Kulwant
After the closure of the prosecution evidence, the statements of
the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein all
the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution
denied all the allegations
levelled by the prosecution and pleaded false implication and examined
It was specifically denied that
deceased had been
subjected to harassment or cruelty on account thereof. The defence taken by
the accused was that the deceased was treated properly in her matrimonial
home and that she remained under mental stress after giving birth to a
CRA-S-1752
female child, as
she had given birth to the seventh daughter.
4.2.
evidence available on record, held the accused guilty and convicted them
under Sections 304
5.
counsel for appellants No.1 and 2 and arguments advanced for appellant
No.3 are taken up together to avoid repetition.
5.1.
the prosecution has failed to prove the essential ingredients required for
constituting an
appellants contended that the allegation regarding payment of
towards the reception ceremony expenses are totally vague
the complainant, during the course of cross
that the said amount had allegedly been arranged by mortgaging the house
with one Subegh Singh of Patiala,
examine him before the Court. It has been further argued that no
documentary evidence whatsoever, including mortgage documents, bank
withdrawal records, receipts, or any other financial material, has been
produced by the prosec
actually borrowed any amount or was compelled to arrange funds on account
of any alleged demand raised by the appellants.
5.2.
reliable eviden
therewith. The allegations regarding demand of scooter are vague, omnibus
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 4 of 23
female child, as there were already six daughters in the
she had given birth to the seventh daughter.
The learned trial Court, after appreciating and evaluating the
evidence available on record, held the accused guilty and convicted them
ions 304-B and 498-A IPC.
For sake of convenience, arguments advance
counsel for appellants No.1 and 2 and arguments advanced for appellant
No.3 are taken up together to avoid repetition.
Learned counsel for the appellants have
the prosecution has failed to prove the essential ingredients required for
constituting an offence under Section 304-B IPC.
contended that the allegation regarding payment of
reception ceremony expenses are totally vague
the complainant, during the course of cross-examination, categorically stated
that the said amount had allegedly been arranged by mortgaging the house
ith one Subegh Singh of Patiala, howeve
examine him before the Court. It has been further argued that no
documentary evidence whatsoever, including mortgage documents, bank
withdrawal records, receipts, or any other financial material, has been
produced by the prosecution to establish that the complainant party had
actually borrowed any amount or was compelled to arrange funds on account
of any alleged demand raised by the appellants.
It has been contended that there is no cogent, independent or
reliable evidence to establish any demand of dowry or cruelty in connection
therewith. The allegations regarding demand of scooter are vague, omnibus
there were already six daughters in the in-laws family and
The learned trial Court, after appreciating and evaluating the
evidence available on record, held the accused guilty and convicted them
For sake of convenience, arguments advanced by learned
counsel for appellants No.1 and 2 and arguments advanced for appellant
No.3 are taken up together to avoid repetition.
for the appellants have vehemently argued that
the prosecution has failed to prove the essential ingredients required for
B IPC. Learned counsel for the
contended that the allegation regarding payment of ₹25,000/-
reception ceremony expenses are totally vague. It is argued that
examination, categorically stated
that the said amount had allegedly been arranged by mortgaging the house
owever, the prosecution failed to
examine him before the Court. It has been further argued that no
documentary evidence whatsoever, including mortgage documents, bank
withdrawal records, receipts, or any other financial material, has been
ution to establish that the complainant party had
actually borrowed any amount or was compelled to arrange funds on account
of any alleged demand raised by the appellants.
It has been contended that there is no cogent, independent or
ce to establish any demand of dowry or cruelty in connection
therewith. The allegations regarding demand of scooter are vague, omnibus
family and
The learned trial Court, after appreciating and evaluating the
evidence available on record, held the accused guilty and convicted them
by learned
counsel for appellants No.1 and 2 and arguments advanced for appellant
vehemently argued that
the prosecution has failed to prove the essential ingredients required for
counsel for the
-
. It is argued that
examination, categorically stated
that the said amount had allegedly been arranged by mortgaging the house
r, the prosecution failed to
examine him before the Court. It has been further argued that no
documentary evidence whatsoever, including mortgage documents, bank
withdrawal records, receipts, or any other financial material, has been
ution to establish that the complainant party had
actually borrowed any amount or was compelled to arrange funds on account
It has been contended that there is no cogent, independent or
ce to establish any demand of dowry or cruelty in connection
therewith. The allegations regarding demand of scooter are vague, omnibus
CRA-S-1752
and unsupported by any independent witness.
been produced to prove such demand. Moreover, it h
the appellant
marriage, which renders the alleged demand doubtful.
5.3.
Sangat Singh and Kaka Singh,
witnesses, were neither examined nor associated with the investigation. This
omission warrants an adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the
Evidence Act
the prosecution.
5.4.
material contradictions in the statements of PW
Jeet Kaur regarding the mediators and the alleged instances of harassment.
5.5.
support the prosecution version of physical cruelty, inasmuch as no external
injury was found on the body of the deceased as per post
Ex.PA.
5.6.
was ever initiated by the complainant party during the lifetime of the
deceased. Such silence is inconsistent with the allegations of continuous
harassment and creates a serious doubt about the veracity of the prosecution
case.
5.7.
female child merely 22 days prior to the occurrence and was suffering from
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 5 of 23
and unsupported by any independent witness.
been produced to prove such demand. Moreover, it h
the appellant-Jaspal Singh was already in possession of a scooter prior to the
marriage, which renders the alleged demand doubtful.
It is further argued that the mediators of the marriage, namely
Sangat Singh and Kaka Singh, who were material and independent
witnesses, were neither examined nor associated with the investigation. This
omission warrants an adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the
Evidence Act, 1872 that their testimony would have been unfavourable to
osecution.
Learned counsel for the appellants
material contradictions in the statements of PW
Jeet Kaur regarding the mediators and the alleged instances of harassment.
It is further contended that the medical evidence does not
support the prosecution version of physical cruelty, inasmuch as no external
injury was found on the body of the deceased as per post
It is further argued that no complaint, panchayat, or legal acti
was ever initiated by the complainant party during the lifetime of the
deceased. Such silence is inconsistent with the allegations of continuous
harassment and creates a serious doubt about the veracity of the prosecution
It has further been argued that the deceased had delivered a
female child merely 22 days prior to the occurrence and was suffering from
and unsupported by any independent witness. No independent witness has
been produced to prove such demand. Moreover, it has come on record that
Jaspal Singh was already in possession of a scooter prior to the
marriage, which renders the alleged demand doubtful.
he mediators of the marriage, namely
who were material and independent
witnesses, were neither examined nor associated with the investigation. This
omission warrants an adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the
that their testimony would have been unfavourable to
for the appellants submit that there are
material contradictions in the statements of PW-2 Manjeet Singh and PW-3
Jeet Kaur regarding the mediators and the alleged instances of harassment.
the medical evidence does not
support the prosecution version of physical cruelty, inasmuch as no external
injury was found on the body of the deceased as per post-mortem report
It is further argued that no complaint, panchayat, or legal action
was ever initiated by the complainant party during the lifetime of the
deceased. Such silence is inconsistent with the allegations of continuous
harassment and creates a serious doubt about the veracity of the prosecution
argued that the deceased had delivered a
female child merely 22 days prior to the occurrence and was suffering from
No independent witness has
as come on record that
Jaspal Singh was already in possession of a scooter prior to the
he mediators of the marriage, namely
who were material and independent
witnesses, were neither examined nor associated with the investigation. This
omission warrants an adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the
that their testimony would have been unfavourable to
that there are
3
the medical evidence does not
support the prosecution version of physical cruelty, inasmuch as no external
mortem report
on
was ever initiated by the complainant party during the lifetime of the
deceased. Such silence is inconsistent with the allegations of continuous
harassment and creates a serious doubt about the veracity of the prosecution
argued that the deceased had delivered a
female child merely 22 days prior to the occurrence and was suffering from
CRA-S-1752
post-partum depression. The accused family had taken proper care of the
deceased and got her admitted in a private hospital at their own ex
5.8.
Gurinder Singh, who stated that there was no demand of dowry or
harassment, and DW
post-partum depression after childbirth.
5.9.
the appellants submit
harassment “soon before death”, which is a
Section 304-
306 IPC are not made out, and the impugned judgment of conviction is liable
to be set aside. The appellants, therefore, deserve to
charges by giving them the benefit of doubt.
6.
judgment and contended that the prosecution has successfully established
that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with
dowry demands.
6.1.
PW-3 Jeet Kaur clearly prove that the accused persons were dissatisfied with
the dowry given and were persistently demanding a scooter.
submitted that the death of the deceased occurred within seven years of
marriage and under
report established presence of organophosphorus pesticide in the viscera,
thereby proving death by poisoning.
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 6 of 23
partum depression. The accused family had taken proper care of the
deceased and got her admitted in a private hospital at their own ex
Reliance has also been placed upon the testimony of DW
Gurinder Singh, who stated that there was no demand of dowry or
harassment, and DW-2 Inder Singh, who deposed regarding the possibility of
partum depression after childbirth.
On the basis of the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel
the appellants submit that the prosecution has failed to prove cruelty or
harassment “soon before death”, which is a
-B IPC. The essential ingredients of
306 IPC are not made out, and the impugned judgment of conviction is liable
to be set aside. The appellants, therefore, deserve to
charges by giving them the benefit of doubt.
Per contra, learned State counsel has supported the impugned
judgment and contended that the prosecution has successfully established
that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with
dowry demands.
It is argued that the testimonies of PW
3 Jeet Kaur clearly prove that the accused persons were dissatisfied with
the dowry given and were persistently demanding a scooter.
submitted that the death of the deceased occurred within seven years of
marriage and under unnatural circumstances. The Chemical Examiner’s
report established presence of organophosphorus pesticide in the viscera,
thereby proving death by poisoning.
partum depression. The accused family had taken proper care of the
deceased and got her admitted in a private hospital at their own expense.
Reliance has also been placed upon the testimony of DW-1
Gurinder Singh, who stated that there was no demand of dowry or
2 Inder Singh, who deposed regarding the possibility of
On the basis of the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for
that the prosecution has failed to prove cruelty or
harassment “soon before death”, which is a sine qua non for attracting
The essential ingredients of Sections 304-B, 498-A and
306 IPC are not made out, and the impugned judgment of conviction is liable
to be set aside. The appellants, therefore, deserve to be acquitted of all the
State counsel has supported the impugned
judgment and contended that the prosecution has successfully established
that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with
It is argued that the testimonies of PW-2 Manjeet Singh and
3 Jeet Kaur clearly prove that the accused persons were dissatisfied with
the dowry given and were persistently demanding a scooter. It is further
submitted that the death of the deceased occurred within seven years of
unnatural circumstances. The Chemical Examiner’s
report established presence of organophosphorus pesticide in the viscera,
partum depression. The accused family had taken proper care of the
1
Gurinder Singh, who stated that there was no demand of dowry or
2 Inder Singh, who deposed regarding the possibility of
for
that the prosecution has failed to prove cruelty or
or attracting
A and
306 IPC are not made out, and the impugned judgment of conviction is liable
be acquitted of all the
State counsel has supported the impugned
judgment and contended that the prosecution has successfully established
that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with
njeet Singh and
3 Jeet Kaur clearly prove that the accused persons were dissatisfied with
It is further
submitted that the death of the deceased occurred within seven years of
unnatural circumstances. The Chemical Examiner’s
report established presence of organophosphorus pesticide in the viscera,
CRA-S-1752
6.2.
established that a woman died other
within seven years of marriage and was subjected to cruelty or harassment in
connection with dowry demand soon before her death, the presumption
under Section 113
the accused.
6.3.
foundational facts necessary for attracting Section
the learned trial Court rightly convicted the appellants.
7.
gone through the record.
"498
her to cruelty
Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a
woman, subjects s
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall
also be liable to fine.
Explanation.
(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is lik
the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to
life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view
to coercing her or any person related to her
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."
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 7 of 23
Learned State counsel further contends that once it is
established that a woman died otherwise than under normal circumstances
within seven years of marriage and was subjected to cruelty or harassment in
connection with dowry demand soon before her death, the presumption
under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act automatically arises agains
It is thus argued that the prosecution has duly proved all
foundational facts necessary for attracting Section
the learned trial Court rightly convicted the appellants.
Heard the counsels appearing for both
gone through the record. Sections 498-A and 304
498-A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting
her to cruelty.-
Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a
woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall
also be liable to fine.
Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, "cruelty" means
(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is lik
the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to
life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view
to coercing her or any person related to her
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."
Learned State counsel further contends that once it is
wise than under normal circumstances
within seven years of marriage and was subjected to cruelty or harassment in
connection with dowry demand soon before her death, the presumption
B of the Indian Evidence Act automatically arises against
It is thus argued that the prosecution has duly proved all
foundational facts necessary for attracting Section 498-A and 304-B IPC and
the learned trial Court rightly convicted the appellants.
or both sides and have carefully
A and 304-B of IPC read as under:
A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting
Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a
uch woman to cruelty shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall
For the purposes of this section, "cruelty" means-
(a) 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) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view
to coercing 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."
Learned State counsel further contends that once it is
wise than under normal circumstances
within seven years of marriage and was subjected to cruelty or harassment in
connection with dowry demand soon before her death, the presumption
t
It is thus argued that the prosecution has duly proved all
IPC and
sides and have carefully
A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting
Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a
uch woman to cruelty shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall
ely to drive
the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view
to meet any unlawful
demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of
CRA-S-1752
"304
(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily
injury or occurs o
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
husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.
Explanation.
have the same meaning as in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition
Act, 1961 (28
(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."
8.
IPC:
a) The death of a woman must have been caused by any burns or bodily
injury, or must have occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances;
b) The death must have been caused within seven years of her marriage;
c) Soon before her death, she must have been subje
harassment by the husband or any relative of her husband; and
d) Cruelty or harassment must be for, or in connection with, any demand for
dowry.
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 8 of 23
304-B. 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
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."
The following are the essential ingredients of Section 304
death of a woman must have been caused by any burns or bodily
injury, or must have occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances;
b) The death must have been caused within seven years of her marriage;
c) Soon before her death, she must have been subje
harassment by the husband or any relative of her husband; and
d) Cruelty or harassment must be for, or in connection with, any demand for
(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily
therwise 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
, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such
husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.
For the purpose of this sub-section, "dowry" shall
have the same meaning as in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition
(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."
The following are the essential ingredients of Section 304-B
death of a woman must have been caused by any burns or bodily
injury, or must have occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances;
b) The death must have been caused within seven years of her marriage;
c) Soon before her death, she must have been subjected to cruelty or
harassment by the husband or any relative of her husband; and
d) Cruelty or harassment must be for, or in connection with, any demand for
(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily
therwise 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
, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such
section, "dowry" shall
have the same meaning as in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition
(2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years
B
death of a woman must have been caused by any burns or bodily
cted to cruelty or
d) Cruelty or harassment must be for, or in connection with, any demand for
CRA-S-1752
9.
no.2 died within seven
whether the provisions of Section 113
attracted or not. Section 113
"113
When the question is
death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such
woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment
for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall
presume that such p
Explanation.
have the same meaning as in Section 304
(45 of 1860)."
10.
will apply when it is established that soon before her death, the woman has
been subjected by the accused to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection
with, any demand for dowry. Therefore, ev
Indian Evidence Act,
subjected by the appellant to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with
any demand of dowry soon before her death. Unless these facts are proved,
the presumptions under Section 113
invoked.
11.
State of Haryana,
Section 304-B, IPC and Section 113
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 9 of 23
It is undisputed in the present case that the
died within seven years of their marriage, thereby
the provisions of Section 113-B of the
attracted or not. Section 113-B of Indian Evidence Act reads as under:
113-B. 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 had 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 304
(45 of 1860)."
The presumption under Section 113
hen it is established that soon before her death, the woman has
been subjected by the accused to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection
with, any demand for dowry. Therefore, even for attracting Section 113
Indian Evidence Act, the prosecution must establish that the deceased was
subjected by the appellant to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with
any demand of dowry soon before her death. Unless these facts are proved,
the presumptions under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act cannot be
The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the judgment of
State of Haryana, 2021 AIR (SC) 2627;
B, IPC and Section 113-B, Evidence Act as under:
resent case that the wife of appellant
years of their marriage, thereby it is to be seen
B of the Indian Evidence Act are
B of Indian Evidence Act reads as under:
B. Presumption as to dowry death.-
whether a person has committed the dowry
death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such
woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment
for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall
erson had caused the dowry death.
For the purposes of this section, "dowry death" shall
have the same meaning as in Section 304-B of Indian Penal Code
The presumption under Section 113-B of Indian Evidence Act
hen it is established that soon before her death, the woman has
been subjected by the accused to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection
en for attracting Section 113-B of
st establish that the deceased was
subjected by the appellant to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with
any demand of dowry soon before her death. Unless these facts are proved,
B of the Evidence Act cannot be
, in the judgment of Satbir Singh v.
2021 AIR (SC) 2627; has summarised the law under
B, Evidence Act as under:
of appellant
it is to be seen
are
whether a person has committed the dowry
death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such
woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment
for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall
For the purposes of this section, "dowry death" shall
B of Indian Penal Code
of Indian Evidence Act
hen it is established that soon before her death, the woman has
been subjected by the accused to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection
B of
st establish that the deceased was
subjected by the appellant to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with
any demand of dowry soon before her death. Unless these facts are proved,
B of the Evidence Act cannot be
Satbir Singh v.
summarised the law under
CRA-S-1752
"i. Section 304
legislative intent to curb the social evil of bride burning and dowry
demand.
ii. The prosecution must at first establish the existence of the
necessary ingredients for constituting an offence under Section 304
B, IPC. Once these ingredients are s
presumption of causality, provided under Section 113
Act operates against the accused.
iii. The phrase "soon before" as appearing in Section 304
cannot be construed to mean `immediately before'. The prosecution
must establish existence of "proximate and live link" between the
dowry death and cruelty or harassment for dowry demand by the
husband or his relatives.
iv. Section 304
categorizing death as homicidal or suicid
reason for such non categorization is due to the fact that death
occurring "otherwise than under normal circumstances" can, in
cases, be homicidal or suicidal or accidental."
12.
deceased took place within seven years of marriage and that the same
occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances. However, these two
circumstances alone are insufficient to attract the pr
B IPC. The prosecution is further required to establish that the deceased was
subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand for dowry
soon before her death. It is only upon proof of these foundational facts that
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 10 of 23
"i. Section 304-B, IPC must be interpreted keeping in
legislative intent to curb the social evil of bride burning and dowry
demand.
ii. The prosecution must at first establish the existence of the
necessary ingredients for constituting an offence under Section 304
B, IPC. Once these ingredients are s
presumption of causality, provided under Section 113
Act operates against the accused.
iii. The phrase "soon before" as appearing in Section 304
cannot be construed to mean `immediately before'. The prosecution
ust establish existence of "proximate and live link" between the
dowry death and cruelty or harassment for dowry demand by the
husband or his relatives.
iv. Section 304-B, IPC does not take a pigeonhole approach in
categorizing death as homicidal or suicid
reason for such non categorization is due to the fact that death
occurring "otherwise than under normal circumstances" can, in
cases, be homicidal or suicidal or accidental."
In the present case, it is not disputed that the death of the
deceased took place within seven years of marriage and that the same
occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances. However, these two
circumstances alone are insufficient to attract the pr
B IPC. The prosecution is further required to establish that the deceased was
subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand for dowry
soon before her death. It is only upon proof of these foundational facts that
B, IPC must be interpreted keeping in mind the
legislative intent to curb the social evil of bride burning and dowry
ii. The prosecution must at first establish the existence of the
necessary ingredients for constituting an offence under Section 304-
B, IPC. Once these ingredients are satisfied, the rebuttable
presumption of causality, provided under Section 113-B, Evidence
iii. The phrase "soon before" as appearing in Section 304-B, IPC
cannot be construed to mean `immediately before'. The prosecution
ust establish existence of "proximate and live link" between the
dowry death and cruelty or harassment for dowry demand by the
B, IPC does not take a pigeonhole approach in
categorizing death as homicidal or suicidal or accidental. The
reason for such non categorization is due to the fact that death
occurring "otherwise than under normal circumstances" can, in
cases, be homicidal or suicidal or accidental."
In the present case, it is not disputed that the death of the
deceased took place within seven years of marriage and that the same
occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances. However, these two
circumstances alone are insufficient to attract the provisions of Section 304-
B IPC. The prosecution is further required to establish that the deceased was
subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand for dowry
soon before her death. It is only upon proof of these foundational facts that
mind the
legislative intent to curb the social evil of bride burning and dowry
ii. The prosecution must at first establish the existence of the
-
atisfied, the rebuttable
B, Evidence
B, IPC
cannot be construed to mean `immediately before'. The prosecution
ust establish existence of "proximate and live link" between the
dowry death and cruelty or harassment for dowry demand by the
B, IPC does not take a pigeonhole approach in
al or accidental. The
reason for such non categorization is due to the fact that death
occurring "otherwise than under normal circumstances" can, in
In the present case, it is not disputed that the death of the
deceased took place within seven years of marriage and that the same
occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances. However, these two
-
B IPC. The prosecution is further required to establish that the deceased was
subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand for dowry
soon before her death. It is only upon proof of these foundational facts that
CRA-S-1752
the statutory presumption under Section 113
can be invoked against the accused.
13.
appraisal of the entire evidence available on record,
prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the
deceased, Gurmeet Kaur, was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the
appellants in connection with a demand for dowry soon before her death.
Though it has been alleged by the complainant
sufficient dowry articles were given at the time of marriage. However,
except for the bald and omnibus assertions of the complainant, no
independent witness has been examined by the prosecution to substantiate
the said allegation
presumed that certain customary articles were given at the time of marriage,
there is nothing on record to establish that the same were given pursuant to
any specific demand raised by the accused persons.
articles at the time of marriage, in the absence of cogent evidence regarding
demand, cannot be termed as dowry within the meaning of law.
14.
alleged demand of
was paid towards the reception
complainant, during cross
₹25,000/- was arranged
Patiala. Said
the version of the complainant regarding the alleged financial compulsion
and borrowing of money to satisfy the alleged demand of the
However, the prosec
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 11 of 23
tatutory presumption under Section 113
can be invoked against the accused.
Adverting to the facts of the present case, upon careful
appraisal of the entire evidence available on record,
prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the
deceased, Gurmeet Kaur, was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the
appellants in connection with a demand for dowry soon before her death.
t has been alleged by the complainant
sufficient dowry articles were given at the time of marriage. However,
except for the bald and omnibus assertions of the complainant, no
independent witness has been examined by the prosecution to substantiate
the said allegation which forms the substratum of the FIR
presumed that certain customary articles were given at the time of marriage,
there is nothing on record to establish that the same were given pursuant to
any specific demand raised by the accused persons.
articles at the time of marriage, in the absence of cogent evidence regarding
demand, cannot be termed as dowry within the meaning of law.
The second allegation against the
alleged demand of ₹25,000/-, which, according to the complainant party,
was paid towards the reception party expenses
complainant, during cross-examination, has
was arranged by mortgaging the house with one
Patiala. Said Subegh Singh would have been
the version of the complainant regarding the alleged financial compulsion
and borrowing of money to satisfy the alleged demand of the
However, the prosecution has failed to examine the said witness.
tatutory presumption under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act
Adverting to the facts of the present case, upon careful
appraisal of the entire evidence available on record, this Court finds that the
prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the
deceased, Gurmeet Kaur, was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the
appellants in connection with a demand for dowry soon before her death.
t has been alleged by the complainant–PW2 Manjeet Singh that
sufficient dowry articles were given at the time of marriage. However,
except for the bald and omnibus assertions of the complainant, no
independent witness has been examined by the prosecution to substantiate
ich forms the substratum of the FIR. Even if it is
presumed that certain customary articles were given at the time of marriage,
there is nothing on record to establish that the same were given pursuant to
any specific demand raised by the accused persons. Mere giving of gifts or
articles at the time of marriage, in the absence of cogent evidence regarding
demand, cannot be termed as dowry within the meaning of law.
The second allegation against the appellants pertains to an
, which, according to the complainant party,
expenses after the marriage. The
has stated that the above amount of
gaging the house with one Subegh Singh of
would have been the best witness to corroborate
the version of the complainant regarding the alleged financial compulsion
and borrowing of money to satisfy the alleged demand of the appellants.
failed to examine the said witness.
B of the Indian Evidence Act
Adverting to the facts of the present case, upon careful
finds that the
prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the
deceased, Gurmeet Kaur, was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the
appellants in connection with a demand for dowry soon before her death.
that
sufficient dowry articles were given at the time of marriage. However,
except for the bald and omnibus assertions of the complainant, no
independent witness has been examined by the prosecution to substantiate
. Even if it is
presumed that certain customary articles were given at the time of marriage,
there is nothing on record to establish that the same were given pursuant to
Mere giving of gifts or
articles at the time of marriage, in the absence of cogent evidence regarding
pertains to an
, which, according to the complainant party,
he
above amount of
Singh of
the best witness to corroborate
the version of the complainant regarding the alleged financial compulsion
.
failed to examine the said witness.
CRA-S-1752
Furthermore, no documentary evidence such as bank withdrawal records,
mortgage documents, or any other financial record has been produced to
establish that the complainant party had borrowed money or was compel
to arrange funds to meet any alleged demand raised by the accused persons.
No relative, employer, or even the maternal uncles of the deceased, who
allegedly contributed towards the marriage expenses, have been examined
by the prosecution to lend
15.
of birth of a female child also does not find
independent evidence available on record. Rather, it has come in evidence
that the in-laws of the deceased had borne the medical expenses relating to
the delivery and had
hospitals in the town. In such circumstances, the allegation that, on the one
hand, the accused persons were bearin
deceased and, on the other hand, simultaneously raising a demand for a
scooter, appears improbable. Moreover, it has also come on record that the
appellant’s family
marriage, thereby rendering the said allegation further doubtful.
16.
specific instance of harassment immediately prior to the death of the
deceased has been mentioned so as to satisfy the essential requirement of
“soon before death”.
witnesses specify with clarity the date, time, place, or manner of any
particular incident of cruelty.
17.
Manjeet Singh, brother of the deceased, and PW
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 12 of 23
Furthermore, no documentary evidence such as bank withdrawal records,
mortgage documents, or any other financial record has been produced to
establish that the complainant party had borrowed money or was compel
to arrange funds to meet any alleged demand raised by the accused persons.
No relative, employer, or even the maternal uncles of the deceased, who
allegedly contributed towards the marriage expenses, have been examined
by the prosecution to lend support to the complainant’s version.
The further allegation regarding demand of a scooter at the time
of birth of a female child also does not find
independent evidence available on record. Rather, it has come in evidence
laws of the deceased had borne the medical expenses relating to
the delivery and had got the deceased admitted in one of the reputed
hospitals in the town. In such circumstances, the allegation that, on the one
hand, the accused persons were bearing the medical expenses of the
deceased and, on the other hand, simultaneously raising a demand for a
scooter, appears improbable. Moreover, it has also come on record that the
’s family was already in possession of a scooter prior to the
thereby rendering the said allegation further doubtful.
Even in the FIR and in the statements of the complainant, no
specific instance of harassment immediately prior to the death of the
deceased has been mentioned so as to satisfy the essential requirement of
“soon before death”. Neither the FIR nor the testimonies of the material
witnesses specify with clarity the date, time, place, or manner of any
particular incident of cruelty.
The prosecution case mainly rests upon the testimonies of PW
Manjeet Singh, brother of the deceased, and PW
Furthermore, no documentary evidence such as bank withdrawal records,
mortgage documents, or any other financial record has been produced to
establish that the complainant party had borrowed money or was compelled
to arrange funds to meet any alleged demand raised by the accused persons.
No relative, employer, or even the maternal uncles of the deceased, who
allegedly contributed towards the marriage expenses, have been examined
to the complainant’s version.
The further allegation regarding demand of a scooter at the time
of birth of a female child also does not find support from any reliable or
independent evidence available on record. Rather, it has come in evidence
laws of the deceased had borne the medical expenses relating to
admitted in one of the reputed
hospitals in the town. In such circumstances, the allegation that, on the one
g the medical expenses of the
deceased and, on the other hand, simultaneously raising a demand for a
scooter, appears improbable. Moreover, it has also come on record that the
was already in possession of a scooter prior to the
thereby rendering the said allegation further doubtful.
the statements of the complainant, no
specific instance of harassment immediately prior to the death of the
deceased has been mentioned so as to satisfy the essential requirement of
Neither the FIR nor the testimonies of the material
witnesses specify with clarity the date, time, place, or manner of any
The prosecution case mainly rests upon the testimonies of PW-2
Manjeet Singh, brother of the deceased, and PW-3 Jeet Kaur, mother of the
Furthermore, no documentary evidence such as bank withdrawal records,
mortgage documents, or any other financial record has been produced to
led
to arrange funds to meet any alleged demand raised by the accused persons.
No relative, employer, or even the maternal uncles of the deceased, who
allegedly contributed towards the marriage expenses, have been examined
The further allegation regarding demand of a scooter at the time
from any reliable or
independent evidence available on record. Rather, it has come in evidence
laws of the deceased had borne the medical expenses relating to
admitted in one of the reputed
hospitals in the town. In such circumstances, the allegation that, on the one
g the medical expenses of the
deceased and, on the other hand, simultaneously raising a demand for a
scooter, appears improbable. Moreover, it has also come on record that the
was already in possession of a scooter prior to the
the statements of the complainant, no
specific instance of harassment immediately prior to the death of the
deceased has been mentioned so as to satisfy the essential requirement of
Neither the FIR nor the testimonies of the material
witnesses specify with clarity the date, time, place, or manner of any
2
3 Jeet Kaur, mother of the
CRA-S-1752
deceased. However, a close scrutiny of their depositions reveals material
discrepancies and omissions, which render their testimonies unreliable and
unworthy of reliance. Manjeet Singh (PW
examination, admitted that he had not stat
police, Ex.PE, that the accused used to beat the deceased. The said assertion,
having been introduced for the first time during trial, amounts to a material
improvement. PW
examination, admitted that in her statement she did not mention the names of
the accused and only referred to the family of the in
daughter. She further stated that she had not recorded in her statement under
Section 161 Cr.P.C. tha
Singla Hospital. She also admitted that she had not got it recorded that
Seema (appellant no.3/ sister
the hospital, they should
would be sent back.
stated that the mediators did not meet them after the marriage and that he
had not complained to them regarding the alleged harassment or demand
a scooter made by the accused family. He specifically stated that he did not
visit their house. On the other hand, PW
examination that Sangat Singh and his son Kaka were the mediators of the
marriage, and that they h
the accused were harassing Gurmeet Kaur
her, the mediators told them th
18.
with regard to
demand of dowry and harassment
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 13 of 23
However, a close scrutiny of their depositions reveals material
discrepancies and omissions, which render their testimonies unreliable and
unworthy of reliance. Manjeet Singh (PW-2), during the course of his cross
examination, admitted that he had not stated in his st
PE, that the accused used to beat the deceased. The said assertion,
having been introduced for the first time during trial, amounts to a material
improvement. PW-3 Jeet Kaur, mother of the deceased, during her cro
examination, admitted that in her statement she did not mention the names of
the accused and only referred to the family of the in
. She further stated that she had not recorded in her statement under
Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the accused had misbehaved with them at Renu
Singla Hospital. She also admitted that she had not got it recorded that
(appellant no.3/ sister-in-law) had told them that
the hospital, they should have given a scooter, failing which their daughter
would be sent back. PW-2 Manjeet Singh, during his cross
stated that the mediators did not meet them after the marriage and that he
had not complained to them regarding the alleged harassment or demand
a scooter made by the accused family. He specifically stated that he did not
visit their house. On the other hand, PW-3 Jeet Kaur stated during her cross
examination that Sangat Singh and his son Kaka were the mediators of the
marriage, and that they had approached both mediators informing them that
the accused were harassing Gurmeet Kaur
her, the mediators told them that they would call the accused.
This contradiction between the testimonies of PW
ard to approaching the mediators of the marriage
demand of dowry and harassment caused to deceased Gurmeet Kaur
However, a close scrutiny of their depositions reveals material
discrepancies and omissions, which render their testimonies unreliable and
2), during the course of his cross-
ed in his statement made to the
PE, that the accused used to beat the deceased. The said assertion,
having been introduced for the first time during trial, amounts to a material
3 Jeet Kaur, mother of the deceased, during her cross-
examination, admitted that in her statement she did not mention the names of
the accused and only referred to the family of the in-laws of her deceased
. She further stated that she had not recorded in her statement under
t the accused had misbehaved with them at Renu
Singla Hospital. She also admitted that she had not got it recorded that
had told them that upon their return to
a scooter, failing which their daughter
2 Manjeet Singh, during his cross-examination,
stated that the mediators did not meet them after the marriage and that he
had not complained to them regarding the alleged harassment or demand for
a scooter made by the accused family. He specifically stated that he did not
3 Jeet Kaur stated during her cross-
examination that Sangat Singh and his son Kaka were the mediators of the
ad approached both mediators informing them that
(since deceased). According to
at they would call the accused.
This contradiction between the testimonies of PW-2 and PW-3
the mediators of the marriage for the alleged
caused to deceased Gurmeet Kaur creates
However, a close scrutiny of their depositions reveals material
discrepancies and omissions, which render their testimonies unreliable and
-
atement made to the
PE, that the accused used to beat the deceased. The said assertion,
having been introduced for the first time during trial, amounts to a material
-
examination, admitted that in her statement she did not mention the names of
of her deceased
. She further stated that she had not recorded in her statement under
t the accused had misbehaved with them at Renu
Singla Hospital. She also admitted that she had not got it recorded that
to
a scooter, failing which their daughter
examination,
stated that the mediators did not meet them after the marriage and that he
for
a scooter made by the accused family. He specifically stated that he did not
-
examination that Sangat Singh and his son Kaka were the mediators of the
ad approached both mediators informing them that
. According to
3
for the alleged
creates
CRA-S-1752
a serious doubt
has failed to examine the mediators of the m
natural and independent witnesses to whom complaints were allegedly made.
Their non-examination, without any plausible explanation, invites an adverse
inference under Section 114(g) of the
testimony would not have supported the prosecution case.
19.
who categorically stated in his examination
mediator in the marriage of Gurmeet Kaur with Jaspal Singh and had be
visiting their house even after the marriage. He further deposed that Gurmeet
Kaur was living happily in her matrimonial home and had never made any
complaint to him regarding any demand of dowry, scooter or harassment at
the hands of the accused person
father, mother nor any other member of the parental family of Gurmeet Kaur
had ever complained to him regarding any demand of dowry by the accused.
Though the witness was cross
suggestion was put to him that he was not a mediator of the marriage. He
was also not confronted on any material aspect of his testimony
bald suggestion that he had deposed falsely to save the accused, his
testimony remained substantia
20.
prosecution case is the absence of any medical evidence supporting the
allegations of physical assault or beating. The post
the deceased was conducted by Dr.
stated in his examination
on the body of the deceased. Had the deceased been subjected to physical
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 14 of 23
doubt in the prosecution story, particularly when
has failed to examine the mediators of the m
natural and independent witnesses to whom complaints were allegedly made.
examination, without any plausible explanation, invites an adverse
inference under Section 114(g) of the Indian
would not have supported the prosecution case.
On the contrary, the defence examined DW
who categorically stated in his examination-
mediator in the marriage of Gurmeet Kaur with Jaspal Singh and had be
visiting their house even after the marriage. He further deposed that Gurmeet
Kaur was living happily in her matrimonial home and had never made any
complaint to him regarding any demand of dowry, scooter or harassment at
the hands of the accused persons. He also stated that neither the brother,
father, mother nor any other member of the parental family of Gurmeet Kaur
had ever complained to him regarding any demand of dowry by the accused.
Though the witness was cross-examined at length
suggestion was put to him that he was not a mediator of the marriage. He
was also not confronted on any material aspect of his testimony
bald suggestion that he had deposed falsely to save the accused, his
testimony remained substantially unshaken.
Another important circumstance which creates doubt in the
prosecution case is the absence of any medical evidence supporting the
allegations of physical assault or beating. The post
the deceased was conducted by Dr. R.P. Jindal (PW
stated in his examination-in-chief that there was no external mark of injury
on the body of the deceased. Had the deceased been subjected to physical
in the prosecution story, particularly when the prosecution
has failed to examine the mediators of the marriage who were the most
natural and independent witnesses to whom complaints were allegedly made.
examination, without any plausible explanation, invites an adverse
Indian Evidence Act that their
would not have supported the prosecution case.
On the contrary, the defence examined DW-1 Gurinder Singh,
-in-chief that he had acted as a
mediator in the marriage of Gurmeet Kaur with Jaspal Singh and had been
visiting their house even after the marriage. He further deposed that Gurmeet
Kaur was living happily in her matrimonial home and had never made any
complaint to him regarding any demand of dowry, scooter or harassment at
s. He also stated that neither the brother,
father, mother nor any other member of the parental family of Gurmeet Kaur
had ever complained to him regarding any demand of dowry by the accused.
at length by the prosecution, no
suggestion was put to him that he was not a mediator of the marriage. He
was also not confronted on any material aspect of his testimony, except for a
bald suggestion that he had deposed falsely to save the accused, his
Another important circumstance which creates doubt in the
prosecution case is the absence of any medical evidence supporting the
allegations of physical assault or beating. The post-mortem examination of
R.P. Jindal (PW-1), who specifically
chief that there was no external mark of injury
on the body of the deceased. Had the deceased been subjected to physical
the prosecution
who were the most
natural and independent witnesses to whom complaints were allegedly made.
examination, without any plausible explanation, invites an adverse
Evidence Act that their
1 Gurinder Singh,
chief that he had acted as a
en
visiting their house even after the marriage. He further deposed that Gurmeet
Kaur was living happily in her matrimonial home and had never made any
complaint to him regarding any demand of dowry, scooter or harassment at
s. He also stated that neither the brother,
father, mother nor any other member of the parental family of Gurmeet Kaur
had ever complained to him regarding any demand of dowry by the accused.
on, no
suggestion was put to him that he was not a mediator of the marriage. He
xcept for a
bald suggestion that he had deposed falsely to save the accused, his
Another important circumstance which creates doubt in the
prosecution case is the absence of any medical evidence supporting the
mortem examination of
1), who specifically
chief that there was no external mark of injury
on the body of the deceased. Had the deceased been subjected to physical
CRA-S-1752
cruelty or beatings, as alleged by the prosecution, some visible inj
would ordinarily have been found on her body. The absence of any such
injury materially weakens the prosecution version regarding physical cruelty.
21.
Manjeet Singh
was expecting a child, she was not brought to her paren
Nursing Home,
Sangrur. He further admitted that although there exists a
whereby the first delivery of a woman ordinarily takes place at her parental
home, but neither did he request the accused to send Gurmeet Kaur to her
parental house, nor did the accused ever express
there. It is also an admitted position that the deceased continued to reside at
her matrimonial home
contended that this circumstance demonstrates that the deceased was being
properly looked after by her in
human conduct and prevailing custom, she would have been taken to her
parental home for delivery. The testimony of PW
supports the inference that the deceased was receiving adequate care an
attention at her matrimonial home.
22.
delivered a female child about 22 days prior to the occurrence. The defence
has taken the plea that the deceased was suffering from post
depression and remained under mental stress after the birth of the child,
particularly as there were already
deceased. In support of the said plea, the defence examined DW
Singh, who stated in his examination
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 15 of 23
cruelty or beatings, as alleged by the prosecution, some visible inj
would ordinarily have been found on her body. The absence of any such
injury materially weakens the prosecution version regarding physical cruelty.
Another aspect which assumes significance is that
Manjeet Singh during cross-examination admitted that when Gurmeet Kaur
was expecting a child, she was not brought to her paren
Nursing Home, was considered to be a reputed hospital
. He further admitted that although there exists a
whereby the first delivery of a woman ordinarily takes place at her parental
neither did he request the accused to send Gurmeet Kaur to her
parental house, nor did the accused ever express
is also an admitted position that the deceased continued to reside at
her matrimonial home at the time of her delivery. The defence has strongly
contended that this circumstance demonstrates that the deceased was being
properly looked after by her in-laws; otherwise, in the ordinary course of
human conduct and prevailing custom, she would have been taken to her
parental home for delivery. The testimony of PW
supports the inference that the deceased was receiving adequate care an
attention at her matrimonial home.
It is an admitted position on record that the deceased had
delivered a female child about 22 days prior to the occurrence. The defence
has taken the plea that the deceased was suffering from post
and remained under mental stress after the birth of the child,
particularly as there were already six daughters in the in
. In support of the said plea, the defence examined DW
Singh, who stated in his examination-in-chie
cruelty or beatings, as alleged by the prosecution, some visible injury marks
would ordinarily have been found on her body. The absence of any such
injury materially weakens the prosecution version regarding physical cruelty.
Another aspect which assumes significance is that PW-2
admitted that when Gurmeet Kaur
was expecting a child, she was not brought to her parental home as Singla
was considered to be a reputed hospital which was at
. He further admitted that although there exists a customary practice
whereby the first delivery of a woman ordinarily takes place at her parental
neither did he request the accused to send Gurmeet Kaur to her
parental house, nor did the accused ever expressed any intention to send her
is also an admitted position that the deceased continued to reside at
of her delivery. The defence has strongly
contended that this circumstance demonstrates that the deceased was being
otherwise, in the ordinary course of
human conduct and prevailing custom, she would have been taken to her
parental home for delivery. The testimony of PW-2, therefore, to some extent
supports the inference that the deceased was receiving adequate care and
It is an admitted position on record that the deceased had
delivered a female child about 22 days prior to the occurrence. The defence
has taken the plea that the deceased was suffering from post-partum
and remained under mental stress after the birth of the child,
six daughters in the in-laws family of the
. In support of the said plea, the defence examined DW-2 Inder
chief that after the birth of the
ury marks
would ordinarily have been found on her body. The absence of any such
injury materially weakens the prosecution version regarding physical cruelty.
2
admitted that when Gurmeet Kaur
tal home as Singla
which was at
customary practice
whereby the first delivery of a woman ordinarily takes place at her parental
neither did he request the accused to send Gurmeet Kaur to her
any intention to send her
is also an admitted position that the deceased continued to reside at
of her delivery. The defence has strongly
contended that this circumstance demonstrates that the deceased was being
otherwise, in the ordinary course of
human conduct and prevailing custom, she would have been taken to her
2, therefore, to some extent
d
It is an admitted position on record that the deceased had
delivered a female child about 22 days prior to the occurrence. The defence
partum
and remained under mental stress after the birth of the child,
laws family of the
2 Inder
f that after the birth of the
CRA-S-1752
female child, Gurmeet Kaur used to remain under depression. Though the
said witness was subjected to lengthy cross
no suggestion was put to him disputing the fact that the deceased was
suffering from depression after childbirth.
Karnataka High Court in
Id # 2147274
fact of post partum depression apart from others could be a possible cause of
suicide of the deceased and upheld the acquittal of the accused therein. The
relevant paragraph is reproduced below:
“24. In the case on hand, within a short period of time
of marriage, she had given birth to a female child and she started to
live in the village which was smaller than the village in which she
was brought up. Further, it is also available on record that the
accused as well as PWs 1 and 3 were ear
coolie work. The cross
also disclose that deceased was not sent for the coolie work and it
was only accused Nos. 1 to 3 who are going for coolie work. If that
is so, the question of harassme
imagination but nothing else. Evidently, such harassment is not
disclosed to a close relative who was instrumental in the marriage
of the accused and the deceased. The hostility of PW
instrumental in settling the mar
the contention of the prosecution and also the evidence of PWs 1,3
and 4. The possibility of a post partum depression and
complications cannot be ruled out in the fact circumstances of the
case.”
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 16 of 23
female child, Gurmeet Kaur used to remain under depression. Though the
said witness was subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the prosecution,
no suggestion was put to him disputing the fact that the deceased was
from depression after childbirth. The Division Bench of Hon’ble
Karnataka High Court in State of Karnataka v. Prakash, Law Finder Doc
Id # 2147274, decision dated 13.12.2022; after taking into consideration
fact of post partum depression apart from others could be a possible cause of
suicide of the deceased and upheld the acquittal of the accused therein. The
relevant paragraph is reproduced below:
24. In the case on hand, within a short period of time
of marriage, she had given birth to a female child and she started to
live in the village which was smaller than the village in which she
was brought up. Further, it is also available on record that the
accused as well as PWs 1 and 3 were ear
coolie work. The cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses
also disclose that deceased was not sent for the coolie work and it
was only accused Nos. 1 to 3 who are going for coolie work. If that
is so, the question of harassme
imagination but nothing else. Evidently, such harassment is not
disclosed to a close relative who was instrumental in the marriage
of the accused and the deceased. The hostility of PW
instrumental in settling the marriage raises a serious doubt about
the contention of the prosecution and also the evidence of PWs 1,3
and 4. The possibility of a post partum depression and
complications cannot be ruled out in the fact circumstances of the
case.”
female child, Gurmeet Kaur used to remain under depression. Though the
examination by the prosecution,
no suggestion was put to him disputing the fact that the deceased was
The Division Bench of Hon’ble
State of Karnataka v. Prakash, Law Finder Doc
after taking into consideration the
fact of post partum depression apart from others could be a possible cause of
suicide of the deceased and upheld the acquittal of the accused therein. The
24. In the case on hand, within a short period of time from the time
of marriage, she had given birth to a female child and she started to
live in the village which was smaller than the village in which she
was brought up. Further, it is also available on record that the
accused as well as PWs 1 and 3 were earning their livelihood by
examination of the prosecution witnesses
also disclose that deceased was not sent for the coolie work and it
was only accused Nos. 1 to 3 who are going for coolie work. If that
is so, the question of harassment appears to be figment of
imagination but nothing else. Evidently, such harassment is not
disclosed to a close relative who was instrumental in the marriage
of the accused and the deceased. The hostility of PW- 12 who was
riage raises a serious doubt about
the contention of the prosecution and also the evidence of PWs 1,3
and 4. The possibility of a post partum depression and
complications cannot be ruled out in the fact circumstances of the
female child, Gurmeet Kaur used to remain under depression. Though the
examination by the prosecution,
no suggestion was put to him disputing the fact that the deceased was
The Division Bench of Hon’ble
State of Karnataka v. Prakash, Law Finder Doc
the
fact of post partum depression apart from others could be a possible cause of
suicide of the deceased and upheld the acquittal of the accused therein. The
from the time
of marriage, she had given birth to a female child and she started to
live in the village which was smaller than the village in which she
was brought up. Further, it is also available on record that the
ning their livelihood by
examination of the prosecution witnesses
also disclose that deceased was not sent for the coolie work and it
was only accused Nos. 1 to 3 who are going for coolie work. If that
nt appears to be figment of
imagination but nothing else. Evidently, such harassment is not
disclosed to a close relative who was instrumental in the marriage
12 who was
riage raises a serious doubt about
the contention of the prosecution and also the evidence of PWs 1,3
and 4. The possibility of a post partum depression and
complications cannot be ruled out in the fact circumstances of the
CRA-S-1752
23.
discard the prosecution case in toto, yet in the present matter, the prosecution
has failed to produce any convincing and reliable evidence to establish that
the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in
demand for dowry soon before her death.
24.
creates doubt regarding the prosecution version. The evidence on record
shows that despite the alleged harassment, no complaint was
any Panchayat, respectable persons of the village or any
were initiated by the complainant party
of the deceased, and PW
that neither any
Village were met to complain about the alleged harassment on account of
dowry. There is also no reliable evidence to show that the complainant party
had ever approached the alleged mediators of the
harassment of the deceased on account of dowry demands.
25.
Act is concerned, the same arises only when the prosecution first establishes
the foundational facts, particularly cruelty or harassment for dowry
before death
vague and unsupported by any independent evidence. Most importantly, the
prosecution has failed to prove that any such cruelty or harassment was
meted out to the deceased “soon before her death”, which is a
for attracting the provisions of Section 304
statutory presumption does not arise. Reliance in this regard is placed upon
decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 17 of 23
Though the defence version by itself may not be sufficient to
discard the prosecution case in toto, yet in the present matter, the prosecution
has failed to produce any convincing and reliable evidence to establish that
the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in
demand for dowry soon before her death.
In the present case, the conduct of the complainant party also
creates doubt regarding the prosecution version. The evidence on record
shows that despite the alleged harassment, no complaint was
any Panchayat, respectable persons of the village or any
were initiated by the complainant party. Both PW
of the deceased, and PW-3 Jeet Kaur, mother of the deceased, have admitted
neither any Panchayat was ever convened
Village were met to complain about the alleged harassment on account of
There is also no reliable evidence to show that the complainant party
had ever approached the alleged mediators of the
harassment of the deceased on account of dowry demands.
Insofar as the presumption under Section 113
Act is concerned, the same arises only when the prosecution first establishes
the foundational facts, particularly cruelty or harassment for dowry
before death. The allegations levelled by the prosecution remain general,
vague and unsupported by any independent evidence. Most importantly, the
prosecution has failed to prove that any such cruelty or harassment was
meted out to the deceased “soon before her death”, which is a
attracting the provisions of Section 304
statutory presumption does not arise. Reliance in this regard is placed upon
decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Baijnath v. State of Madhya
version by itself may not be sufficient to
discard the prosecution case in toto, yet in the present matter, the prosecution
has failed to produce any convincing and reliable evidence to establish that
the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with
In the present case, the conduct of the complainant party also
creates doubt regarding the prosecution version. The evidence on record
shows that despite the alleged harassment, no complaint was ever made to
any Panchayat, respectable persons of the village or any legal proceedings
. Both PW-2 Manjeet Singh, brother
3 Jeet Kaur, mother of the deceased, have admitted
anchayat was ever convened, nor respectable persons of the
Village were met to complain about the alleged harassment on account of
There is also no reliable evidence to show that the complainant party
had ever approached the alleged mediators of the marriage regarding
harassment of the deceased on account of dowry demands.
Insofar as the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence
Act is concerned, the same arises only when the prosecution first establishes
the foundational facts, particularly cruelty or harassment for dowry soon
the prosecution remain general,
vague and unsupported by any independent evidence. Most importantly, the
prosecution has failed to prove that any such cruelty or harassment was
meted out to the deceased “soon before her death”, which is a sine qua non
attracting the provisions of Section 304-B IPC. Consequently, the
statutory presumption does not arise. Reliance in this regard is placed upon
Baijnath v. State of Madhya
version by itself may not be sufficient to
discard the prosecution case in toto, yet in the present matter, the prosecution
has failed to produce any convincing and reliable evidence to establish that
connection with
In the present case, the conduct of the complainant party also
creates doubt regarding the prosecution version. The evidence on record
ever made to
legal proceedings
2 Manjeet Singh, brother
3 Jeet Kaur, mother of the deceased, have admitted
, nor respectable persons of the
Village were met to complain about the alleged harassment on account of
There is also no reliable evidence to show that the complainant party
marriage regarding
B of the Evidence
Act is concerned, the same arises only when the prosecution first establishes
soon
the prosecution remain general,
vague and unsupported by any independent evidence. Most importantly, the
prosecution has failed to prove that any such cruelty or harassment was
sine qua non
Consequently, the
statutory presumption does not arise. Reliance in this regard is placed upon
Baijnath v. State of Madhya
CRA-S-1752
Pradesh, 2017 (1) SCC 101;
unnatural death in the matrimonial home and that too within seven years of
marriage is ipso facto not sufficient to bring home the charge under
Sections 304B
accused prosecution has to prove
of dowry by cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt
general allegations unsupported by
insufficient to invoke the statutory presumption under section 113
Indian Evidence Act.
“31. Section
dowry death in the following terms:
"113B. Presumption as to dowry death.
whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it
is shown that soon before her death such woman has been subjecte
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
have the same meaning as in
Code (45 of 1860)"
32. Noticeably this presumption as well is founded on the proof of
cruelty or harassment of the woman dead for or in connection with
any demand for dowry by
presumption as to dowry death thus would get activated only upon
the proof of the fact that the deceased lady had been subjected to
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 18 of 23
Pradesh, 2017 (1) SCC 101; wherein it was held
unnatural death in the matrimonial home and that too within seven years of
marriage is ipso facto not sufficient to bring home the charge under
304B and 498A of I.P.C. against accused and to convict the
prosecution has to prove ingredient of cruelty on account of demand
of dowry by cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt
general allegations unsupported by cogent and reliable evidence are
insufficient to invoke the statutory presumption under section 113
Indian Evidence Act. The relevant paragraphs are reproduced below:
“31. Section 113B of the Act enjoins
dowry death in the following terms:
"113B. Presumption as to dowry death.
whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it
is shown that soon before her death such woman has been subjecte
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 purpose of this section, "dowry death" shall
have the same meaning as in Section
Code (45 of 1860)"
32. Noticeably this presumption as well is founded on the proof of
cruelty or harassment of the woman dead for or in connection with
any demand for dowry by the person charged with the offence.
presumption as to dowry death thus would get activated only upon
the proof of the fact that the deceased lady had been subjected to
wherein it was held that the factum of
unnatural death in the matrimonial home and that too within seven years of
marriage is ipso facto not sufficient to bring home the charge under
of I.P.C. against accused and to convict the
ingredient of cruelty on account of demand
of dowry by cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt. It was also held that
cogent and reliable evidence are
insufficient to invoke the statutory presumption under section 113-B of
The relevant paragraphs are reproduced below:
of the Act enjoins a statutory presumption as to
"113B. 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
For the purpose of this section, "dowry death" shall
Section 304B of the Indian Penal
32. Noticeably this presumption as well is founded on the proof of
cruelty or harassment of the woman dead for or in connection with
the person charged with the offence. The
presumption as to dowry death thus would get activated only upon
the proof of the fact that the deceased lady had been subjected to
that the factum of
unnatural death in the matrimonial home and that too within seven years of
marriage is ipso facto not sufficient to bring home the charge under
of I.P.C. against accused and to convict the
ingredient of cruelty on account of demand
held that
cogent and reliable evidence are
B of
a statutory presumption as to
When the question is
whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it
d
by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with,
any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person
For the purpose of this section, "dowry death" shall
of the Indian Penal
32. Noticeably this presumption as well is founded on the proof of
cruelty or harassment of the woman dead for or in connection with
The
presumption as to dowry death thus would get activated only upon
the proof of the fact that the deceased lady had been subjected to
CRA-S-1752
cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand for
dowry by the accused
death
to invoke the otherwise statutorily ordained presumption of
commission of the offence of dowry death by the person charged
therewith.
33. A co
burden of the prosecution to unassailably substantiate the
ingredients of the two offences by direct and convincing evidence so
as to avail the presumption engrafted in Section
against the accused.
or his relative or the person charged is thus the sine qua non to
inspirit the statutory presumption, to draw the person charged
within the coil
cogent coherent and persuasive evidence to prove such fact, the
person accused of either of the above referred offences cannot be
held guilty by taking refuge only of the presumption to cover up the
shortfall in proof.
34. The legislative primature of relieving the prosecution of the
rigour of the proof of the often practically inaccessible recesses of
life within the guarded confines of a matrimonial home and of
replenishing the consequential void, by
against the person charged, cannot be overeased to gloss
condone its failure to prove credibly, the basic facts enumerated in
the Sections involved, lest justice is the casualty.
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 19 of 23
cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand for
dowry by the accused and that too in the reasonable contiguity of
death. Such a proof is thus the legislatively mandated prerequisite
to invoke the otherwise statutorily ordained presumption of
commission of the offence of dowry death by the person charged
therewith.
33. A conjoint reading of these three provisions, thus predicate the
burden of the prosecution to unassailably substantiate the
ingredients of the two offences by direct and convincing evidence so
as to avail the presumption engrafted in Section
against the accused. Proof of cruelty or harassment by the husband
or his relative or the person charged is thus the sine qua non to
inspirit the statutory presumption, to draw the person charged
within the coils thereof. If the prosecution fails to demonstrate by
cogent coherent and persuasive evidence to prove such fact, the
person accused of either of the above referred offences cannot be
held guilty by taking refuge only of the presumption to cover up the
rtfall in proof.
34. The legislative primature of relieving the prosecution of the
rigour of the proof of the often practically inaccessible recesses of
life within the guarded confines of a matrimonial home and of
replenishing the consequential void, by
against the person charged, cannot be overeased to gloss
condone its failure to prove credibly, the basic facts enumerated in
the Sections involved, lest justice is the casualty.
cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand for
and that too in the reasonable contiguity of
. Such a proof is thus the legislatively mandated prerequisite
to invoke the otherwise statutorily ordained presumption of
commission of the offence of dowry death by the person charged
njoint reading of these three provisions, thus predicate the
burden of the prosecution to unassailably substantiate the
ingredients of the two offences by direct and convincing evidence so
as to avail the presumption engrafted in Section 113B of the Act
Proof of cruelty or harassment by the husband
or his relative or the person charged is thus the sine qua non to
inspirit the statutory presumption, to draw the person charged
s thereof. If the prosecution fails to demonstrate by
cogent coherent and persuasive evidence to prove such fact, the
person accused of either of the above referred offences cannot be
held guilty by taking refuge only of the presumption to cover up the
34. The legislative primature of relieving the prosecution of the
rigour of the proof of the often practically inaccessible recesses of
life within the guarded confines of a matrimonial home and of
replenishing the consequential void, by according a presumption
against the person charged, cannot be overeased to gloss-over and
condone its failure to prove credibly, the basic facts enumerated in
the Sections involved, lest justice is the casualty.
cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand for
and that too in the reasonable contiguity of
. Such a proof is thus the legislatively mandated prerequisite
to invoke the otherwise statutorily ordained presumption of
commission of the offence of dowry death by the person charged
njoint reading of these three provisions, thus predicate the
burden of the prosecution to unassailably substantiate the
ingredients of the two offences by direct and convincing evidence so
of the Act
Proof of cruelty or harassment by the husband
or his relative or the person charged is thus the sine qua non to
inspirit the statutory presumption, to draw the person charged
s thereof. If the prosecution fails to demonstrate by
cogent coherent and persuasive evidence to prove such fact, the
person accused of either of the above referred offences cannot be
held guilty by taking refuge only of the presumption to cover up the
34. The legislative primature of relieving the prosecution of the
rigour of the proof of the often practically inaccessible recesses of
life within the guarded confines of a matrimonial home and of
according a presumption
over and
condone its failure to prove credibly, the basic facts enumerated in
CRA-S-1752
35.
Section
propounded that the presumption is contingent on the fact that the
prosecution first
Section
State of Punjab, 2011(2) RCR (Criminal) 878 : 2011(3) Recent
Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 123 : (2011) 11 SC
in Rajeev Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2013(4) RCR (Criminal)
964 : 2013(6) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 362 : (2013) 16
SCC 640
one of the essential ingredients of dowry death under
Section
the woman to cruelty in connection with demand for dowry soon
before her death and that this ingredient has to be proved by the
prosecution bey
presume that the accused has committed the offence of dowry death
under Section
earlier decision of this Cou
Rao, 2002(4) RCR (Criminal) 697 : (2003) 1 SCC 217
that to attract the provision of Section
main ingredients of the offence w
is that "soon before her death" she was subjected to cruelty and
harassment "in connection with the demand for dowry
36. Tested on the judicially adumbrated parameters as above,
are of the unhesitant opinion that
prove
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 20 of 23
35. This Court while often dwelling on the s
Section 304B of the Code and Section
propounded that the presumption is contingent on the fact that the
prosecution first spell out the ingredients of the offence of
Section 304B as in Shindo Alias Sawinder Kaur and another v.
State of Punjab, 2011(2) RCR (Criminal) 878 : 2011(3) Recent
Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 123 : (2011) 11 SC
Rajeev Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2013(4) RCR (Criminal)
964 : 2013(6) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 362 : (2013) 16
SCC 640. In the latter pronouncement, this Court propounded that
one of the essential ingredients of dowry death under
Section 304B of the Code is that the accused must have subjected
the woman to cruelty in connection with demand for dowry soon
before her death and that this ingredient has to be proved by the
prosecution beyond reasonable doubt and only then the Court will
presume that the accused has committed the offence of dowry death
under Section 113B of the Act. It referred to with approval, the
earlier decision of this Court in K. Prema S. Rao v. Yadla Srinivasa
Rao, 2002(4) RCR (Criminal) 697 : (2003) 1 SCC 217
that to attract the provision of Section
main ingredients of the offence which is required to be established
is that "soon before her death" she was subjected to cruelty and
harassment "in connection with the demand for dowry
36. Tested on the judicially adumbrated parameters as above,
are of the unhesitant opinion that
prove beyond reasonable doubt, cruelty or harassment to the
This Court while often dwelling on the scope and purport of
of the Code and Section 113B of the Act have
propounded that the presumption is contingent on the fact that the
spell out the ingredients of the offence of
Shindo Alias Sawinder Kaur and another v.
State of Punjab, 2011(2) RCR (Criminal) 878 : 2011(3) Recent
Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 123 : (2011) 11 SCC 517 and echoed
Rajeev Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2013(4) RCR (Criminal)
964 : 2013(6) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 362 : (2013) 16
. In the latter pronouncement, this Court propounded that
one of the essential ingredients of dowry death under
of the Code is that the accused must have subjected
the woman to cruelty in connection with demand for dowry soon
before her death and that this ingredient has to be proved by the
ond reasonable doubt and only then the Court will
presume that the accused has committed the offence of dowry death
of the Act. It referred to with approval, the
K. Prema S. Rao v. Yadla Srinivasa
Rao, 2002(4) RCR (Criminal) 697 : (2003) 1 SCC 217 to the effect
that to attract the provision of Section 304B of the Code, one of the
hich is required to be established
is that "soon before her death" she was subjected to cruelty and
harassment "in connection with the demand for dowry
36. Tested on the judicially adumbrated parameters as above, we
are of the unhesitant opinion that the prosecution has failed to
beyond reasonable doubt, cruelty or harassment to the
cope and purport of
of the Act have
propounded that the presumption is contingent on the fact that the
spell out the ingredients of the offence of
Shindo Alias Sawinder Kaur and another v.
State of Punjab, 2011(2) RCR (Criminal) 878 : 2011(3) Recent
and echoed
Rajeev Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2013(4) RCR (Criminal)
964 : 2013(6) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 362 : (2013) 16
. In the latter pronouncement, this Court propounded that
one of the essential ingredients of dowry death under
of the Code is that the accused must have subjected
the woman to cruelty in connection with demand for dowry soon
before her death and that this ingredient has to be proved by the
ond reasonable doubt and only then the Court will
presume that the accused has committed the offence of dowry death
of the Act. It referred to with approval, the
K. Prema S. Rao v. Yadla Srinivasa
to the effect
of the Code, one of the
hich is required to be established
is that "soon before her death" she was subjected to cruelty and
we
prosecution has failed to
beyond reasonable doubt, cruelty or harassment to the
CRA-S-1752
deceased for or in connection with any demand for dowry as
contemplated in either of the two provisions of the Code under
which the accused persons had been charged. Noti
alleged demand centers around a motorcycle, which as the evidence
of the prosecution witnesses would evince, admittedly did not
surface at the time of finalisation of the marriage. PW
of the deceased has even conceded that there w
at that stage. According to her, when the husband (who is dead) had
insisted for a motorcycle thereafter he was assured that he would be
provided with the same, finances permitting. Noticeably again, the
demand, as sought to be projected
be true had lingered for almost two years. Yet admittedly, no
complaint was made thereof to anyone, far less the police.
from the general allegations in the same tone in geminated with
parrot like similarity by the
cruelty and harassment to the deceased is founded on the
confidential communications by her to her parents in particular and
is not supported by any other quarter.
26.
on record sufficient material to indicate that the deceased was subjected to
cruelty or harassment by the appellant
There is also
compelled the deceased to commit suicide.
27.
its case beyond reasonable doubt. Where material contradictions, and other
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 21 of 23
deceased for or in connection with any demand for dowry as
contemplated in either of the two provisions of the Code under
which the accused persons had been charged. Noti
alleged demand centers around a motorcycle, which as the evidence
of the prosecution witnesses would evince, admittedly did not
surface at the time of finalisation of the marriage. PW
of the deceased has even conceded that there w
at that stage. According to her, when the husband (who is dead) had
insisted for a motorcycle thereafter he was assured that he would be
provided with the same, finances permitting. Noticeably again, the
demand, as sought to be projected by the prosecution, if accepted to
be true had lingered for almost two years. Yet admittedly, no
complaint was made thereof to anyone, far less the police.
from the general allegations in the same tone in geminated with
parrot like similarity by the prosecution witnesses, the allegation of
cruelty and harassment to the deceased is founded on the
confidential communications by her to her parents in particular and
is not supported by any other quarter.
In the present case the prosecution has not been able to produce
sufficient material to indicate that the deceased was subjected to
cruelty or harassment by the appellants in connection with demand of dowry.
also no specific allegation that the appellant
compelled the deceased to commit suicide.
Criminal jurisprudence mandates that prosecution must prove
its case beyond reasonable doubt. Where material contradictions, and other
deceased for or in connection with any demand for dowry as
contemplated in either of the two provisions of the Code under
which the accused persons had been charged. Noticeably, the
alleged demand centers around a motorcycle, which as the evidence
of the prosecution witnesses would evince, admittedly did not
surface at the time of finalisation of the marriage. PW-5, the mother
of the deceased has even conceded that there was no dowry demand
at that stage. According to her, when the husband (who is dead) had
insisted for a motorcycle thereafter he was assured that he would be
provided with the same, finances permitting. Noticeably again, the
by the prosecution, if accepted to
be true had lingered for almost two years. Yet admittedly, no
complaint was made thereof to anyone, far less the police. Apart
from the general allegations in the same tone in geminated with
prosecution witnesses, the allegation of
cruelty and harassment to the deceased is founded on the
confidential communications by her to her parents in particular and
is not supported by any other quarter.".
…….emphasis supplied
nt case the prosecution has not been able to produce
sufficient material to indicate that the deceased was subjected to
in connection with demand of dowry.
no specific allegation that the appellants directly incited or
Criminal jurisprudence mandates that prosecution must prove
its case beyond reasonable doubt. Where material contradictions, and other
deceased for or in connection with any demand for dowry as
contemplated in either of the two provisions of the Code under
ceably, the
alleged demand centers around a motorcycle, which as the evidence
of the prosecution witnesses would evince, admittedly did not
5, the mother
as no dowry demand
at that stage. According to her, when the husband (who is dead) had
insisted for a motorcycle thereafter he was assured that he would be
provided with the same, finances permitting. Noticeably again, the
by the prosecution, if accepted to
be true had lingered for almost two years. Yet admittedly, no
Apart
from the general allegations in the same tone in geminated with
prosecution witnesses, the allegation of
cruelty and harassment to the deceased is founded on the
confidential communications by her to her parents in particular and
nt case the prosecution has not been able to produce
sufficient material to indicate that the deceased was subjected to
in connection with demand of dowry.
directly incited or
Criminal jurisprudence mandates that prosecution must prove
its case beyond reasonable doubt. Where material contradictions, and other
CRA-S-1752
factors coexist, the benefit of doubt must necessarily ensue to the accused,
In Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116
while relying upon its previous decision in
Pradesh, 1973 (2) SCC 808
create reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to its benefit. The relevant
part is reproduced below:
“162. We then pass on to another important point which seems to
have been completely missed by the High Court. It is well settle
that where on the evidence two possibilities are available or open,
one which goes in favour of the prosecution and the other which
benefits an accused, the accused is undoubtedly entitled to the
benefit of doubt. In
2 SCC 808
"Another golden thread which runs through the web of the
administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the
guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which
is favourable to the accused should be adopted. This principle has a
special relevance in cases wherein the guilt of the accused is sought
to be established by circumstantial evidence."
28.
2026 (2) RCR (Criminal) 800
criminal trial, in case there are two inferences possible, then the one
favouring the accused must be followed.
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 22 of 23
coexist, the benefit of doubt must necessarily ensue to the accused,
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116
while relying upon its previous decision in Kali Ram v. State of Himachal
Pradesh, 1973 (2) SCC 808; had emphasised t
create reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to its benefit. The relevant
part is reproduced below:
“162. We then pass on to another important point which seems to
have been completely missed by the High Court. It is well settle
that where on the evidence two possibilities are available or open,
one which goes in favour of the prosecution and the other which
benefits an accused, the accused is undoubtedly entitled to the
benefit of doubt. In Kali Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh
2 SCC 808, this Court made the following observations :
"Another golden thread which runs through the web of the
administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the
guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which
is favourable to the accused should be adopted. This principle has a
special relevance in cases wherein the guilt of the accused is sought
to be established by circumstantial evidence."
More recently, In Narendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh,
2026 (2) RCR (Criminal) 800; the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in a
criminal trial, in case there are two inferences possible, then the one
favouring the accused must be followed.
coexist, the benefit of doubt must necessarily ensue to the accused,
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116;
Kali Ram v. State of Himachal
; had emphasised that where circumstances
create reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to its benefit. The relevant
“162. We then pass on to another important point which seems to
have been completely missed by the High Court. It is well settled
that where on the evidence two possibilities are available or open,
one which goes in favour of the prosecution and the other which
benefits an accused, the accused is undoubtedly entitled to the
Kali Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (1973)
, this Court made the following observations :
"Another golden thread which runs through the web of the
administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the
guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which
is favourable to the accused should be adopted. This principle has a
special relevance in cases wherein the guilt of the accused is sought
to be established by circumstantial evidence."
Narendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh,
; the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in a
criminal trial, in case there are two inferences possible, then the one
coexist, the benefit of doubt must necessarily ensue to the accused,
;
Kali Ram v. State of Himachal
hat where circumstances
create reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to its benefit. The relevant
“162. We then pass on to another important point which seems to
d
that where on the evidence two possibilities are available or open,
one which goes in favour of the prosecution and the other which
benefits an accused, the accused is undoubtedly entitled to the
, (1973)
"Another golden thread which runs through the web of the
administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the
guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which
is favourable to the accused should be adopted. This principle has a
special relevance in cases wherein the guilt of the accused is sought
Narendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh,
; the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in a
criminal trial, in case there are two inferences possible, then the one
CRA-S-1752
29.
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur, are hereby set aside. The appellants are
acquitted of the charges framed against them by
to them.
31.
discharged. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
29.05.2026
Puneet
1752-SB-2004 (O&M)
Page 23 of 23
Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur, are hereby set aside. The appellants are
acquitted of the charges framed against them by
The bail bonds/surety bonds of the appellants shall stand
discharged. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand
(RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL)
Whether speaking/reasoned
Whether reportable
Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur, are hereby set aside. The appellants are
acquitted of the charges framed against them by extending benefit of doubt
The bail bonds/surety bonds of the appellants shall stand
discharged. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand
(RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL)
JUDGE
: Yes/No
: Yes/No
Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.08.2004 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur, are hereby set aside. The appellants are
extending benefit of doubt
The bail bonds/surety bonds of the appellants shall stand
discharged. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in the case of CRA-S-1752-SB-2004 (O&M), has overturned a **Dowry Death Conviction** under **Section 304B IPC**, providing crucial insights into the evidentiary requirements for such offences. This detailed judgment, now available on CaseOn, highlights the meticulous scrutiny required in cases involving allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty.
The case stemmed from the conviction of Jit Kaur and others under Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution alleged that Gurmeet Kaur, married to appellant Jaspal Singh on March 17, 2002, died by consuming poison on May 3, 2003, within seven years of marriage. It was claimed that the accused subjected her to harassment and cruelty over insufficient dowry, including demands for ₹25,000 for the reception and a scooter. The deceased had delivered a female child approximately 22 days before her death.
The trial court convicted the appellants, leading to this appeal.
The core of this case revolves around Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, often read in conjunction with Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act, which deals with the presumption of dowry death.
Section 498-A penalizes the husband or his relatives for subjecting a woman to cruelty. 'Cruelty' is defined broadly to include wilful conduct likely to drive a woman to suicide or cause grave injury, or harassment to coerce her or her relatives to meet unlawful demands for property or valuable security.
This section defines 'dowry death' as the death of a woman caused by burns, bodily injury, or occurring otherwise than under normal circumstances, within seven years of her marriage, where it is shown that she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, soon before her death. The husband or relative is deemed to have caused her death.
This section states that when the question is whether a person has committed dowry death, and it is shown that soon before her death, the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry, the court shall presume that such person caused the dowry death. Crucially, this presumption is contingent upon the prosecution first establishing the foundational facts of cruelty or harassment 'soon before death' linked to a dowry demand.
The High Court meticulously re-evaluated the evidence, focusing on whether the prosecution had indeed established the 'soon before death' cruelty, which is a prerequisite for invoking the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act.
The Court found the prosecution's allegations regarding dowry demands to be largely unsubstantiated. The claim of ₹25,000 paid for reception expenses, allegedly arranged by mortgaging a house, lacked any documentary evidence (like mortgage papers or bank records) or the testimony of the alleged lender, Subegh Singh. Similarly, the demand for a scooter appeared doubtful, especially since the appellant's family already owned a scooter and had reportedly borne the medical expenses for the deceased's recent delivery.
A significant aspect of the analysis was the identification of material discrepancies and omissions in the testimonies of the key prosecution witnesses, PW-2 (brother) and PW-3 (mother). For instance, PW-2 admitted not mentioning physical beatings in his initial police statement, and PW-3's account of approaching marriage mediators contradicted PW-2's statement. The prosecution's failure to examine these crucial mediators, despite their alleged involvement in addressing the harassment, led the Court to draw an adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the Indian Evidence Act.
The post-mortem report (Ex.PA) did not show any external injury marks, weakening the claims of physical cruelty. Furthermore, the Court noted the absence of any prior complaints to the Panchayat, respectable persons, or the police by the complainant party during the deceased's lifetime, which cast serious doubt on the veracity of the continuous harassment allegations.
The defence's plea that the deceased was suffering from post-partum depression after giving birth to a female child was given weight. DW-2, a defence witness, testified to this, and the prosecution did not dispute the fact. The Court referenced a Karnataka High Court decision (State of Karnataka v. Prakash, Law Finder Doc Id # 2147274) where post-partum depression was considered a possible cause of suicide, reinforcing the idea that alternative explanations for the death must be considered.
For legal professionals and students grappling with the nuances of such judgments, CaseOn.in offers invaluable assistance. Our 2-minute audio briefs distill the essence of these specific rulings, providing quick and comprehensive summaries that highlight key arguments, legal precedents, and the Court's rationale, making complex legal analysis accessible and efficient.
The Court emphasized that the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act is not automatic. It arises only when the foundational facts of cruelty or harassment linked to dowry demands 'soon before death' are established beyond a reasonable doubt. Citing Supreme Court judgments like Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana and Baijnath v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Court reiterated that general allegations are insufficient to invoke this statutory presumption. Given the prosecution's failure to prove these essential ingredients, the presumption could not be applied.
Applying the well-established principle that if two views are possible on the evidence, the one favouring the accused must be adopted, the Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge. The appellants were acquitted of all charges, receiving the benefit of doubt.
This judgment is an essential read for legal professionals and students for several reasons:
This case underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring justice based on concrete evidence, preventing convictions based on mere suspicion or insufficient proof in sensitive cases like dowry deaths.
All information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are advised to consult with a qualified legal professional for any specific legal concerns.
Legal Notes
Add a Note....