Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Sambhaji Mahadeo Kadam (accused No.1), Mahadeo Khandu Kadam (accused No.2), and Shantabai Mahadeo Kadam (accused No.3), were convicted by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur in Sessions Case No.79 of 2000 for offences under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. They were acquitted of the charge under Section 304-B IPC. The State did not challenge the acquittal. The prosecution case was that accused No.1 married Sujata on 5th February 1999, and the marriage was settled only after the complainant (PW4), Sujata's father, agreed to pay a dowry of Rs.80,000, two tola gold, and household articles. The complainant paid Rs.70,000 and gave the articles at the time of marriage. It was alleged that soon after fifteen days of marriage, the accused started demanding the remaining Rs.10,000 and subjected Sujata to cruelty and harassment. Sujata committed suicide by setting herself on fire on 20th June 1999. The trial court convicted the appellants. The High Court, on appeal, examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove the ingredients of abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. The court noted that the presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act is not automatic and the prosecution must first establish the basic ingredients of abetment. The evidence of the father (PW4) was inconsistent and the alleged demand of Rs.10,000 was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. There was no evidence of instigation or active participation by the appellants in the suicide. The court also held that the conviction under Section 498-A IPC was not sustainable as the cruelty was not proved. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dowry Death - Abetment to Suicide - Sections 498-A, 306, 34 IPC - Presumption under Section 113A Evidence Act - The appellants were convicted for cruelty and abetment to suicide of the deceased. The High Court held that the presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act is not automatic and the prosecution must first establish the basic ingredients of abetment. In the absence of evidence of instigation or active participation, the conviction cannot be sustained. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband or Relatives - Section 498-A IPC - Demand of Dowry - The prosecution alleged demand of dowry and harassment. The court found that the evidence of the father (PW4) was inconsistent and the alleged demand of Rs.10,000 was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction under Section 498-A was set aside. (Paras 3-8) C) Evidence Act - Presumption as to Abetment of Suicide - Section 113A - The court observed that the presumption under Section 113A can be raised only if the prosecution proves that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demands. In this case, the evidence was insufficient to raise such presumption. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable on the basis of evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellants acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Presumption under Section 113A of Evidence Act is not automatic
- burden on prosecution to prove basic ingredients of abetment to suicide
- mere demand of dowry does not constitute abetment
- cruelty must be proximate to suicide
