Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Jaihind Sitaram Khale, was convicted under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad, in Sessions Case No. 69 of 1995, for subjecting his wife Sunita to cruelty by demanding Rs. 5,000 and one tola gold. The appellant married Sunita on 14.5.1993. Initially, she was treated well for two months, but thereafter the accused persons made an unlawful demand of Rs. 5,000 (allegedly unpaid balance of dowry) and one tola gold. Sunita was subjected to cruelty due to non-fulfillment of the demand. PW3 Prakash Gadekar (victim's maternal uncle) and PW4 Mohan Jagtap (cousin brother) visited the matrimonial home and were informed of the demand. PW3 was told to bring the amount and gold, otherwise Sunita would not be sent for cohabitation. PW4 was informed by Sunita about the demand and cruelty. The appellant and his parents (accused nos. 2 and 3) were tried for offences under Sections 498A, 304B read with 34 IPC. The trial court acquitted all accused of Section 304B IPC and acquitted accused nos. 2 and 3 of Section 498A IPC, but convicted the appellant under Section 498A IPC, sentencing him to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the testimonies of PW3 and PW4 were consistent and credible, establishing the demand and cruelty. The court noted that the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act was not applicable as the death occurred more than seven years after marriage. The court held that the acquittal of co-accused does not affect the appellant's conviction. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband - Section 498A Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Demand of Dowry - The appellant was convicted for subjecting his wife to cruelty by demanding Rs. 5,000 and one tola gold. The court held that the evidence of PW3 and PW4 established the demand and cruelty, and the conviction was upheld. (Paras 1-10) B) Evidence - Presumption under Section 113B Evidence Act, 1872 - Not Applicable - Since the death of the victim occurred more than seven years after marriage, the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act was not attracted. (Para 2) C) Criminal Law - Acquittal of Co-accused - Effect on Conviction - The acquittal of accused nos. 2 and 3 does not affect the conviction of the appellant if there is sufficient evidence against him. (Para 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code for subjecting his wife to cruelty by demanding Rs. 5,000 and one tola gold is sustainable on the basis of evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence under Section 498A IPC upheld.
Law Points
- Cruelty under Section 498A IPC includes both physical and mental harm
- demand of dowry amounts to cruelty
- presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act not applicable when death not within seven years of marriage
- acquittal of co-accused does not affect conviction of appellant if evidence sufficient
