Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Husband and In-Laws for Abetment of Suicide and Cruelty in Dowry Harassment Case. The court confirmed the trial court's finding that the appellants subjected the deceased to cruelty and harassment for dowry, leading to her suicide within seven years of marriage under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 IPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 41
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellants, Moreshwar Neelkanth Thengari, Neelkanth Arjun Thengari, Sau. Panchabai Neelkanth Thengari, and Sou. Mangala Ramesh Hargude, were convicted by the 2nd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad in Sessions Trial 27/2000 for offences punishable under Section 498A and Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They were sentenced to simple imprisonment for two years under Section 498A and five years under Section 306, with fines. The appellants appealed to the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. On the date of hearing, neither the appellants nor their counsel appeared despite a previous adjournment. The court expressed displeasure at the counsel's conduct and decided the appeal on merits after scrutinizing the record. The court noted that the appeal was an old criminal appeal and the accused were on bail. The court upheld the conviction, finding that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Abetment of Suicide - Section 306 IPC - Conviction upheld where deceased committed suicide within seven years of marriage and evidence showed cruelty and harassment for dowry - Held that the prosecution proved the ingredients of abetment of suicide beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-3).

B) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband or Relatives - Section 498A IPC - Conviction sustained where evidence established that appellants subjected deceased to cruelty and harassment for dowry - Held that the trial court correctly convicted the appellants under Section 498A IPC (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable on the basis of evidence on record.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court are confirmed.

Law Points

  • Section 498A IPC
  • Section 306 IPC
  • Section 34 IPC
  • Abetment of Suicide
  • Cruelty by Husband or Relatives
  • Presumption under Section 113A Evidence Act
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (08) 157

Criminal Appeal No. 373 of 2002

2017-08-24

Rohit B. Deo, J.

Shri H.R. Dhumale, Addl.P.P. for the respondent

Moreshwar Neelkanth Thengari, Neelkanth Arjun Thengari, Sau. Panchabai Neelkanth Thengari, Sou. Mangala Ramesh Hargude

State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for offences under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 IPC.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.

Filing Reason

Appellants were convicted for subjecting the deceased to cruelty and abetting her suicide.

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted the appellants and sentenced them to imprisonment and fine.

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 498A IPC is sustainable. Whether the conviction under Section 306 IPC read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable.

Submissions/Arguments

None for the appellants. Respondent argued that the conviction is based on evidence and should be upheld.

Ratio Decidendi

The court upheld the conviction after scrutinizing the record, finding that the prosecution proved the ingredients of Sections 498A and 306 IPC beyond reasonable doubt.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellants seek to assail the judgment and order dated 0672002 delivered by the learned 2nd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad in Sessions Trial 27/2000, by and under which the appellants are convicted for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In light of the noncooperative attitude of the Counsel, I have no option but to decide the appeal on merits after scrutinizing the record, which I have done.

Procedural History

The appellants were convicted by the 2nd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad in Sessions Trial 27/2000. They appealed to the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The appeal was heard on 24 August 2017, and the court dismissed the appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): Section 498A, Section 306, Section 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Husband and In-Laws for Abetment of Suicide and Cruelty in Dowry Harassment Case. The court confirmed the trial court's finding that the appellants subjected the deceased to cruelty and harassment for dowry, le...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Mentally Challenged Person to Donate Kidney to Brother Under Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 — Natural Guardians Can Give Consent for Organ Donation by Mentally Incompetent Donor.