Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Sachin Ramchandra Teke (husband) and Suman Ramchandra Teke and Sunil Ramchandra Teke (in-laws), were convicted by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras, for offences under Sections 498-A, 302, 304-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Sessions Case No.69 of 2010. They were sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, seven years for dowry death, and one year for cruelty. The case arose from the death of the deceased, who was married to appellant Sachin in 2008. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment for dowry, specifically a demand for a motorcycle and cash, and that she died due to burn injuries within seven years of marriage. The trial court relied on the dying declaration of the deceased and the testimony of her father and other witnesses to convict the appellants. The appellants appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove the foundational facts of dowry demand and cruelty soon before death. The dying declaration was inconsistent with the medical evidence and other circumstances. The court noted that the father of the deceased gave contradictory statements regarding the alleged dowry demand. The court also observed that there was no evidence of any demand of dowry at the time of marriage or thereafter. Consequently, the court held that the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act could not be invoked. The court also found that the conviction under Section 302 IPC was unsustainable as the dying declaration was not reliable and the chain of circumstantial evidence was incomplete. The court allowed the appeals, set aside the conviction and sentence, and directed the release of the appellants unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dowry Death - Section 304-B IPC - Presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act - The prosecution must first establish the foundational facts of demand of dowry and cruelty soon before death. In the absence of credible evidence of dowry demand, the presumption under Section 113-B cannot be invoked. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry soon before her death. (Paras 10-18) B) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Circumstantial Evidence - Dying Declaration - The dying declaration must be reliable and consistent with other evidence. Inconsistencies in the dying declaration and lack of corroboration by medical evidence render the conviction under Section 302 unsustainable. The court held that the dying declaration was not free from doubt and the chain of circumstances was incomplete. (Paras 19-25) C) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband or Relatives - Section 498-A IPC - Demand of Dowry - The allegations of cruelty must be specific and proved by independent evidence. Vague and general allegations of harassment without proof of dowry demand cannot sustain a conviction under Section 498-A. The court held that the prosecution witnesses gave inconsistent versions regarding the alleged demand of a motorcycle and cash. (Paras 10-15) D) Dowry Prohibition Act - Sections 3 and 4 - Demand of Dowry - The prosecution must prove that the accused demanded dowry as a consideration for marriage. In the absence of any demand made at the time of marriage or thereafter, the conviction under the Dowry Prohibition Act is not maintainable. The court held that there was no evidence of any demand of dowry either at the time of marriage or subsequently. (Paras 16-18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 498-A, 302, 304-B read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is sustainable in law based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeals are allowed. The judgment and order dated 29th June 2012 passed by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras in Sessions Case No.69 of 2010 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all charges. They shall be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Dowry death
- Section 304-B IPC
- presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act
- demand of dowry
- cruelty
- Section 498-A IPC
- Section 302 IPC
- circumstantial evidence
- dying declaration
- inconsistency in prosecution case
