Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order dated 3rd February 1996 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna in Sessions Case No. 154 of 1991, whereby the sole accused Suresh Ganesh Jadhav was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case was that the deceased Chaya, daughter of PW-1 Dhurpadabai and PW-2 Daulatrao, was married to the accused about ten months before her death. At the time of marriage, her parents had given Rs.21,000/- as dowry. After marriage, Chaya resided with the accused and occasionally visited her parents. During one such visit, she allegedly told her mother that the accused was demanding additional dowry of Rs.5,000/- and that she was being harassed. On 12th June 1991, Chaya sustained burn injuries and was admitted to the hospital, where she succumbed to her injuries on 14th June 1991. The prosecution examined several witnesses, including the parents (PW-1 and PW-2), the police officer who recorded the dying declaration (PW-4), and the doctor (PW-5). The trial court acquitted the accused, finding that the prosecution had failed to prove the demand of dowry or cruelty soon before death, and that the dying declaration was not reliable. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the testimony of PW-1 and PW-2 regarding dowry demand was vague and inconsistent; there was no contemporaneous complaint or corroboration. The dying declaration (Exh. 28) was recorded by a police officer without certification by a doctor that the deceased was in a fit state of mind, and the doctor (PW-5) stated that the deceased was not in a position to give a statement. The High Court held that the trial court's findings were plausible and not perverse, and that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, 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 establish that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment 'soon before her death' in connection with dowry demand. In the absence of such evidence, the presumption under Section 113B cannot be invoked. The court held that the evidence of PW-1 and PW-2 regarding dowry demand was vague and unreliable, and there was no contemporaneous complaint or corroboration. (Paras 10-15) B) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Circumstantial Evidence - Dying Declaration - For conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the chain must be complete and consistent only with guilt. The dying declaration (Exh. 28) was not proved as voluntary or reliable; it was recorded by a police officer without certification by a doctor, and the deceased was in a precarious condition. The court held that the dying declaration could not be the sole basis for conviction. (Paras 16-20) C) Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeal - Interference by High Court - The appellate court should not lightly reverse an acquittal unless the findings are perverse or based on no evidence. The trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not unreasonable. The High Court held that no interference was warranted. (Paras 21-22)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the accused for the offence of murder under Section 302 IPC and alternatively for dowry death under Section 304B IPC was perverse or against the weight of evidence.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna in Sessions Case No. 154 of 1991 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Dowry death
- Section 304B IPC
- presumption under Section 113B Evidence Act
- Section 302 IPC
- circumstantial evidence
- dying declaration
- cruelty
- harassment
- acquittal appeal
- interference with acquittal
