Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a criminal revision application filed by the original complainant, Sahebrao Dattu Mahajan, challenging the acquittal of the accused (respondents 2 to 6) by the Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Sessions Case No. 153/2004. The deceased, Suwarna, was the niece of the complainant and was married to accused No. 2 (Haribhau Kashiram Mahajan) about two years prior to the incident. She died in her matrimonial home in village Vivare. The prosecution alleged that the accused demanded Rs. 1 lakh from the deceased to be brought from the complainant, and that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment for dowry. The deceased died by burning, and a dying declaration was recorded. The trial court acquitted all accused of offences under Sections 302, 304-B, 498-A read with 34 IPC. The High Court, in revision, examined the evidence. The court noted that the demand of Rs. 1 lakh was alleged to have been made 8-10 months before the death, which does not satisfy the requirement of 'soon before death' under Section 304-B IPC. The dying declaration was found to be inconsistent and not reliable. The medical evidence did not conclusively prove homicidal death. The court held that the trial court's findings were not perverse and that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The revision was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Revisional Jurisdiction - Scope of Interference - High Court's revisional power is limited and cannot be exercised as an appellate power; interference with acquittal is warranted only if the judgment is perverse or suffers from gross miscarriage of justice. (Paras 1-2) B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304-B - Dowry Death - 'Soon Before Death' - The demand of Rs. 1 lakh alleged to have been made by accused must be shown to have been made 'soon before' the death of the deceased; evidence of demand made 8-10 months prior does not satisfy the proximity requirement. (Paras 4-6) C) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 113-B - Presumption as to Dowry Death - The presumption under Section 113-B arises only if it is proved that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment 'soon before her death' in connection with demand of dowry; in absence of such proof, presumption cannot be invoked. (Paras 5-6) D) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 498-A - Cruelty by Husband or Relatives - Allegations of cruelty must be proved by credible evidence; vague and inconsistent statements of witnesses regarding demand of money do not establish cruelty. (Paras 4-5) E) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - In absence of direct evidence, prosecution must prove chain of circumstances pointing to guilt; dying declaration and medical evidence must be consistent; contradictions in dying declaration and lack of proof of homicidal death lead to acquittal. (Paras 7-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the accused for offences under Sections 304-B, 498-A, and 302 IPC was perverse or erroneous, warranting interference in revision.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the revision application and upheld the acquittal of all accused.
Law Points
- Dowry death
- Section 304-B IPC
- presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act
- 'soon before death'
- demand of dowry
- cruelty
- Section 498-A IPC
- murder
- Section 302 IPC
- acquittal
- revision
- scope of revisional jurisdiction
