Summary
Appeal against conviction under Section 304-B IPC for the dowry death of the appellant's wife within about sixteen months of marriage. The Supreme Court held that the post-mortem showed death by ante-mortem injuries from mechanical violence, that consistent testimony of the deceased's father and brothers established dowry demands and harassment soon before death, and that the accused's divergent defences (accidental fall or suicide over a knee ailment) were unsubstantiated; the conviction and ten-year sentence were upheld.
Issues
- Whether the ingredients of dowry death under Section 304-B IPC, including cruelty or harassment for dowry soon before death, were proved against the accused-appellant.
- Whether a demand of money to secure a job for the husband amounts to a demand for dowry.
- Whether the trial court could receive the medical officer's evidence on affidavit under Section 296 CrPC and, if not, whether the irregularity vitiated the trial.
- Whether the defence theories of accidental fall or suicide due to a knee ailment were made out.
Provisions considered
- Section 304-B, Penal Code, 1860Death of a woman by bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of marriage, where she was subjected soon before death to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with a dowry demand, is dowry death. The Court found the death was by ante-mortem injuries caused by mechanical violence, occurred at the matrimonial home within about sixteen months of marriage, and was preceded by continuous dowry-related harassment, so all ingredients were made out. (¶¶ 20, 27, 30, 31, 38, 39)
- Section 113-B, Indian Evidence Act, 1872Once the prosecution proved harassment for dowry continuing till soon before death, the presumption of dowry death arose and the burden shifted to the accused, which he failed to discharge; the courts below applied this presumption and the Supreme Court found no infirmity. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11, 13, 40)
- Section 296, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Section 296 permits only evidence of a formal character to be given on affidavit. The Court held that accepting the medical officer's substantive evidence on affidavit was contrary to this mandate (corresponding to Section 332 BNSS), but since the defence cross-examined him on the affidavit and post-mortem report without objection, it was a curable irregularity causing no prejudice. (¶¶ 25, 26)
- Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973In his examination the accused denied dowry demands and claimed the deceased had a knee ailment and that he was away at a job interview; the Court noted that the theory of a defence witness that the accused took the deceased to hospital in his car was never propounded in the Section 313 statement. (¶¶ 7, 35)
Held
- Where the medical officer's testimony does not elaborate the number and nature of injuries or give a specific opinion on cause of death, and the public prosecutor is negligent, the presiding officer must remain vigilant and put court questions to the witness to elicit those details. (¶ 22)
- Receiving the substantive evidence of a medical officer on affidavit is contrary to Section 296 CrPC, which permits only evidence of a formal character on affidavit; but where the defence cross-examined the witness on the affidavit and post-mortem report and raised no objection to the mode of recording, the omission is a curable irregularity as no prejudice was caused. (¶¶ 25, 26)
- Death caused by ante-mortem injuries resulting from mechanical violence is death otherwise than under normal circumstances within the meaning of Section 304-B IPC. (¶ 27)
- Diametrically opposite defences, that the deceased accidentally fell from the terrace or that she committed suicide by jumping because of a knee problem, cannot stand where an unchallenged witness saw her body lying on a cot on the second floor with blood oozing from nose and ear, and where defence doctors themselves showed her knee pain was being treated and had subsided. (¶¶ 28, 29, 32, 33, 34)
- Consistent testimony of the deceased's father and brothers that she was continuously harassed for dowry, that Rs. 50,000 was paid against a demand of Rs. 5 lakhs made so that the husband could secure a job, and that she telephoned her brother on the morning of her death saying she had been beaten and feared for her life, is sufficient evidence of cruelty in connection with a dowry demand soon before death. (¶¶ 30, 31, 38, 39)
- Where the body was found on the second floor of the house but a defence witness claimed the accused took the deceased to hospital in his car, a theory not put forward in the Section 313 CrPC statement, the inference is that the accused shifted the body to mislead the investigation. (¶¶ 35, 36)
- The husband, as the person primarily responsible for the demands of money and under a greater moral and legal obligation for his wife's well-being, was rightly distinguished from his acquitted parents by the courts below with cogent reasons. (¶ 37)
Result
Appeal dismissed. Conviction under Section 304-B IPC and sentence of ten years' rigorous imprisonment affirmed. Appellant, on bail, to surrender within four weeks to serve the remaining sentence. Pending applications disposed of.