Gujarat High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Dowry Death Case Due to Lack of Evidence. Prosecution Failed to Prove Demand of Dowry Soon Before Death Under Section 304B IPC and Section 113B of Evidence Act.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-19 19:49:34

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The State of Gujarat appealed against the judgment and order dated 16.04.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Case No.194 of 2000, whereby the respondents (accused) were acquitted of offences under Sections 498A, 302, 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The prosecution case was that the deceased Nurjaha was married to accused No.1 Yusufbhai Hasanbhai Qureshi about four years prior to the incident. Initially, the marriage was smooth, but later the deceased was subjected to physical and mental harassment for demand of Rs.25,000/- and a buffalo. The deceased left the matrimonial home on two occasions but returned after settlement. On 29.04.2000, a fire broke out in the house, resulting in the death of the deceased and her daughter. The brother of the deceased (PW-2) lodged a complaint alleging that the deceased was set on fire due to dowry demands. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution evidence insufficient. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove any demand of dowry soon before the death. The brother of the deceased admitted that he had no personal knowledge of the harassment. The medical evidence did not establish homicidal death. The trial court's findings were plausible and not perverse. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the acquittal.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Dowry Death - Section 304B IPC - Presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act - The presumption of dowry death arises only if it is proved that soon before her death, the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with demand of dowry. In the present case, the prosecution failed to establish any demand of dowry soon before the death, as the deceased had returned to matrimonial home only a few days prior and there was no evidence of fresh demand. The trial court's acquittal was upheld. (Paras 5-8)

B) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband - Section 498A IPC - Requirement of proof of cruelty - The allegations of harassment for dowry were vague and not supported by independent witnesses. The brother of the deceased (PW-2) admitted in cross-examination that he had no personal knowledge of the alleged harassment. The trial court correctly held that the prosecution failed to prove cruelty. (Paras 6-7)

C) Criminal Law - Appeal against Acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Scope of interference - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal will not interfere unless the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence. The trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not unreasonable. Hence, the appeal was dismissed. (Paras 9-10)

Issue of Consideration

Whether the trial court's acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 302, 304B, 498A IPC and Sections 3, 7 of Dowry Prohibition Act was perverse and liable to be set aside.

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Case No.194 of 2000 dated 16.04.2001.

Law Points

Presumption under Section 113B of Evidence Act not automatic
requires proof of dowry death
Acquittal appeal under Section 378 CrPC
limited scope
Benefit of doubt when prosecution fails to prove demand of dowry soon before death
Inconsistencies in witness testimony lead to acquittal.

Case Details

2026:GUJHC:4672-DB

R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 598 of 2001

2026-01-21

ILESH J. VORA, R. T. VACHHANI

2026:GUJHC:4672-DB

MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Appellant; MR MC BAROT for the Respondents

State of Gujarat

Yusufbhai Hasanbhai Qureshi & Ors.

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against acquittal in a dowry death case.

Remedy Sought

The State of Gujarat sought to set aside the acquittal of the respondents and convict them for offences under Sections 302, 304B, 498A IPC and Sections 3, 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Filing Reason

The State was dissatisfied with the judgment of the Sessions Court acquitting the accused, alleging that the trial court had erred in appreciating the evidence.

Previous Decisions

The learned Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Case No.194 of 2000 dated 16.04.2001 acquitted the respondents of all charges.

Issues

Whether the trial court's acquittal was perverse and liable to be set aside? Whether the prosecution proved the demand of dowry soon before the death of the deceased? Whether the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act was attracted?

Submissions/Arguments

Learned APP argued that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused despite sufficient evidence of dowry demand and harassment. Learned counsel for the respondents argued that the trial court's findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence and no interference was warranted.

Ratio Decidendi

The presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act arises only if it is proved that soon before her death, the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with demand of dowry. In the absence of such proof, the presumption cannot be invoked. The trial court's acquittal was based on plausible reasoning and was not perverse, hence no interference in appeal.

Judgment Excerpts

The presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act is not automatic and arises only if the prosecution proves that soon before her death, the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with demand of dowry. The trial court's findings are based on proper appreciation of evidence and are not perverse. Hence, no interference is called for.

Procedural History

The respondents were tried in Sessions Case No.194 of 2000 before the learned Sessions Judge, Mehsana, who acquitted them on 16.04.2001. The State of Gujarat filed the present appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. against the acquittal. The High Court heard the appeal and dismissed it on 21.01.2026.