Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Shaikh Juned Shaikh Moti Mansuri (husband) and Julekha Begum (mother-in-law), were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No.394 of 2009 for offences under Sections 302 and 498A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The husband was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and one year rigorous imprisonment for cruelty, while the mother-in-law was sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment for cruelty. The prosecution case was that the deceased Heena Begum was married to appellant No.1 and was subjected to harassment because the appellant No.1 doubted her character and she had not conceived a child, and appellant No.2 taunted her about her complexion and threatened a second marriage. The deceased died due to burns. The appellants appealed to the Bombay High Court. The court examined the evidence, including the dying declaration of the deceased which was recorded by a police officer and not by a Magistrate, and found it unreliable. The medical evidence did not conclusively prove that the burns were homicidal. The court also found that the evidence of PW-3 (sister-in-law) regarding harassment was vague and not corroborated. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the convictions and sentences, and acquitted both appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Homicidal Death - Prosecution failed to prove that the death of the deceased was homicidal - The deceased died due to burns but the medical evidence did not conclusively establish that the burns were caused by the appellants - The dying declaration was not reliable as it was not recorded by a Magistrate and there were inconsistencies - Held that conviction under Section 302 IPC cannot be sustained (Paras 1-20). B) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband or Relatives - Section 498A IPC - Dowry Harassment - The evidence of PW-3 (sister-in-law) regarding harassment was vague and not corroborated by independent witnesses - The alleged harassment regarding character and complexion did not amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC - Held that the conviction under Section 498A IPC is not sustainable (Paras 21-30). C) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - The dying declaration was recorded by a police officer and not by a Magistrate - There was no certificate of fitness of the deceased to make the statement - The declaration was inconsistent with other evidence - Held that the dying declaration cannot be relied upon (Paras 15-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302 and 498A read with 34 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Convictions and sentences set aside. Appellants acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Section 302 IPC requires proof of homicidal death
- Section 498A IPC requires proof of cruelty
- Section 304B IPC requires death within seven years of marriage and cruelty soon before death
- Section 113B Evidence Act presumption only if death occurs within seven years of marriage and cruelty shown
- Section 306 IPC requires abetment to suicide
