Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the acquittal of Ashok Tukaram Sawant, Tukaram Bala Sawant, and Malan Tukaram Sawant (respondents) by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli in Sessions Case No. 24 of 1998. The respondents were originally charged under Sections 498A, 304B, 302, 201 read with Section 34 IPC for the dowry death of Shobha, who married accused No. 1 on 08.03.1993. The prosecution alleged that after the marriage, the accused demanded Rs. 50,000 from Shobha's father Bhimrao upon his retirement, and when the demand was not met, they subjected Shobha to cruelty and harassment. On 05.10.1997, a quarrel occurred, and Shobha's brother Ramesh rescued her, but accused No. 3 prevented her from leaving. During the night of 5th and 6th October 1997, accused Nos. 2 and 3 consumed insecticide and were hospitalized. On 06.10.1997, Shobha died. The trial court acquitted all accused, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the demand of dowry and cruelty soon before death. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the prosecution witnesses were inconsistent and the medical evidence did not support homicidal death. The court held that the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act could not be invoked as the foundational facts were not established. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dowry Death - Section 304B IPC - Presumption under Section 113B Evidence Act - The prosecution must first prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand of dowry soon before her death. In the absence of such proof, the presumption under Section 113B cannot be invoked. The court found that the alleged demand of Rs. 50,000 was not established as a dowry demand and there was no evidence of cruelty or harassment soon before death. (Paras 1-53) B) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Circumstantial Evidence - The prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances leading to the only inference of guilt. The medical evidence did not support the theory of homicidal death, and the conduct of the accused was consistent with innocence. (Paras 1-53) C) Criminal Law - Causing Disappearance of Evidence - Section 201 IPC - The prosecution did not prove that the accused caused any evidence to disappear with intent to screen themselves from punishment. The cremation of the body was in the normal course. (Paras 1-53)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 498A, 304B, 302, 201 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondents for all offences.
Law Points
- Dowry death
- Section 304B IPC
- presumption under Section 113B Evidence Act
- demand of dowry
- cruelty
- Section 498A IPC
- murder
- Section 302 IPC
- causing disappearance of evidence
- Section 201 IPC
- common intention
- Section 34 IPC
