Case Note & Summary
The case involves two appeals arising from the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, in Sessions Case No. 26 of 2009. The appellant, Sanjay Uttam Suryavanshi (original accused No.1), was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife Manisha by setting her on fire, and along with his parents and brother (original accused Nos.2 to 4) under Section 498A IPC for cruelty. The trial court acquitted all accused under Section 304B IPC (dowry death) and acquitted original accused No.5 of all charges. The appellant challenged his conviction, while the State appealed against the acquittal under Section 304B IPC. The facts are that Manisha married the appellant on 20 May 2006. The informant (her father) paid Rs.70,000/- dowry and gave articles. After six months, the appellant and his family demanded Rs.1,00,000/- for an auto-rickshaw. The informant could not pay. On 26 March 2009, Manisha was set on fire and died. The prosecution relied on the dying declaration of the deceased, which implicated the appellant. The court held that the dying declaration was voluntary and reliable, corroborated by medical evidence and the testimony of the informant. The demand of dowry was proved, but the prosecution failed to show that the demand was made 'soon before death' as required under Section 304B IPC, as the last demand was about one year prior. Hence, the conviction under Section 302 IPC and Section 498A IPC was upheld, and the acquittal under Section 304B IPC was confirmed. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Dying Declaration - Conviction based on dying declaration is sustainable if it is voluntary, truthful, and corroborated by medical evidence and other circumstances - Held that the dying declaration of the deceased implicating the appellant-husband was reliable and corroborated by the testimony of the informant and the doctor, hence conviction under Section 302 IPC upheld (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Law - Dowry Death - Section 304B IPC - Presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act - Demand of dowry 'soon before death' must be proved - Held that the prosecution failed to establish that the demand of Rs.1,00,000/- was made 'soon before death' as the last demand was about one year prior to the incident, hence acquittal of co-accused under Section 304B IPC upheld (Paras 16-20). C) Criminal Law - Cruelty - Section 498A IPC - Demand of Dowry - Conviction of husband and in-laws for cruelty is sustainable if there is evidence of persistent demand and harassment - Held that the evidence of the informant and the deceased's statements showed continuous demand of dowry and harassment, hence conviction under Section 498A IPC confirmed (Paras 21-25).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC and Section 498A IPC is sustainable; whether the acquittal of co-accused under Section 304B IPC and other offences is correct.
Final Decision
Criminal Appeal No. 1470 of 2011 filed by Sanjay Uttam Suryavanshi is dismissed. Criminal Appeal No. 944 of 2012 filed by the State is dismissed. The conviction and sentence under Sections 302 and 498A IPC are upheld, and the acquittal under Section 304B IPC is confirmed.
Law Points
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 304B IPC
- Section 498A IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 201 IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- 1961
- presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act
- dying declaration
- corroboration
- demand of dowry
- cruelty
- soon before death
