Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.08.1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Sessions Case No.132/1994, acquitting the respondents (original accused) for offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and Section 498-A read with 34 IPC. The deceased Sarubai was the daughter of complainant Jayabai (PW-3). About four years before her death, Sarubai married accused No.1 Baban. According to the prosecution, about one year before the incident, accused No.1 demanded Rs.10,000 and a watch from the deceased's parental home. The complainant, a widow, could not give the money but gave a watch. The accused persons allegedly beat and ill-treated Sarubai for non-fulfillment of the demand. Accused No.1 left Sarubai with his parents (accused No.2 and 3) and went to Mumbai. Later, accused No.2 brought Sarubai to the complainant's house and left her there. About 15 days before the incident, the complainant learned that accused No.1 had returned from Mumbai. About 8-9 days before the incident, the complainant left Sarubai at her matrimonial home. At that time, accused No.1 enquired whether the amount had been brought. The prosecution alleged that on the day of the incident, the accused persons poured kerosene on Sarubai and set her on fire, causing her death. The trial court acquitted all accused. The State appealed. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry soon before her death. The demand of Rs.10,000 and a watch was made about one year prior, and there was no evidence of any fresh demand or cruelty shortly before the incident. The witnesses gave inconsistent statements, and the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case. The court held that the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act was not attracted. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeal - Standard of Proof - The State appealed against acquittal under Sections 302 and 498-A IPC - The High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry shortly before her death - The evidence of witnesses was inconsistent and lacked corroboration - The appeal was dismissed, affirming the acquittal (Paras 1-10). B) Dowry Prohibition - Dowry Death - Section 113-B Evidence Act - Presumption of dowry death arises only if it is shown that soon before her death the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry - In this case, the demand of Rs.10,000 and a watch was made about one year before the incident, and there was no evidence of any demand or cruelty soon before death - Hence, the presumption under Section 113-B was not attracted (Paras 5-10). C) Criminal Law - Cruelty - Section 498-A IPC - The alleged ill-treatment and beating of the deceased by the accused was not proved by reliable evidence - The witnesses gave contradictory statements and the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case - The acquittal was upheld (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 302 and 498-A read with 34 IPC was justified in the absence of credible evidence of cruelty and dowry demand.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 302 and 498-A read with 34 IPC.
Law Points
- Acquittal appeal
- standard of proof
- presumption of innocence
- dowry death
- cruelty
- demand of dowry
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 498-A IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 113-B Evidence Act
