Recently, the Calcutta High Court held that there should be a perceptible nexus between her death and dowry related harassment. It is never that harassment or cruelty was caused to the woman with a demand for at some time if Section 304B is to be invoked, but it should happen soon before her death.
Brief facts:
The factual matrix of the case is that the father of the victim lodged the complaint against the four accused persons, in which it was alleged that his younger daughter was married to the accused (Mubarak Ansari) as per the muslim rites and customs. At the time of marriage Mubarak was a student in high school, and it was made clear that after the marriage of his daughter, he would have to bear the cost of his son-in-law’s studies, and his daughter would also work as labour and gift her earnings to Mubarak to meet his cost of study. It was further alleged that the Father-in-law and mother-in-law of his daughter used to assault her and often said that she was not fit for their son. Thereafter, on 26.05.2007, the complainant came to know that his daughter had died by hanging in her maternal home. After the investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the accused persons under Sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court convicted the accused A1 and A2 for the offences punishable under Section 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal is filed.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant contended that the requirements of sections 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code were not satisfied, and the post-mortem report and the inquest report clearly indicate that it is a case of suicide. It was furthermore alleged that no such evidence was brought by the prosecution that soon before her death, she was subjected to any physical torture to meet the ingredients of Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. Moreover, it was contended that the gifts given at the time of marriage couldn’t be considered as dowry. Also, there is no clinching evidence that establishes that there was any harassment by the accused persons for dowry.
Contentions of the State:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state contended that the evidence brought on record by the prosecution establishes the charges against the Appellants. It was furthermore contended that if a woman commits suicide within seven years of her marriage, a presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act has to be drawn.
Observations of the Court:
The Hon’ble Court highlighted the essentials that are required to be satisfied to convict an accused for an offence under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and these essentials are:
1. The death of woman must have been caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise that under normal circumstances;
2. Such death must have occurred within seven years of marriage;
3. Soon before her death, the woman must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or by relatives of her husband;
4. Such cruelty or harassment must be for or in connection with demand of dowry.
It is only when the aforementioned ingredients are established by acceptable evidence such death shall be called “dowry death” and such husband or his relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.
The Court observed that “in order to attract provision of Section 304B, the deceased must have been subjected to harassment of cruelty “soon before her death”. In other words, there should be a perceptible nexus between her death and dowry related harassment. It is never that harassment or cruelty was caused to the woman with a demand for at some time if Section 304B is to be invoked, but it should happen soon before her death.”
The Court noted that the victim was at her paternal home with the de facto complainant and she came back to the matrimonial house on 25.05.2007 and died on 26.07.2007. Furthermore, no evidence was brought up by the prosecution that the victim was subjected to torture soon before her death.
The Court noted that the legislative object in providing such a radius of time by employing the words “soon before her death” is to emphasise the idea that her death should, in all probabilities, have been the aftermath of such cruelty or harassment. In other words, there should be a perceptible nexus between her death and the dowry-related harassment or cruelty inflicted on her. If the interval elapsed between the infliction of such harassment or cruelty and her death, the court would be in a position to gauge that in all probabilities the harassment or cruelty would not have been the immediate cause of her death.
The court further relied upon the judgments titled Rajesh Chaddha Vs State of Uttar Pradesh, Major Singh and Anr. vs State of Punjab, Baijnath & Ors. vs State of Madhya Pradesh, and Kans Raj vs. State of Punjab.
Based on these considerations, the Court was of the opinion that the prosecution had failed to substantiate the ingredients of Section 304B beyond a reasonable doubt, and the Court set aside the judgment passed by the learned trial court.
The decision of the Court:
With the above direction, the court allowed the criminal appeal.
Case Title: Mubarak Ansari & Anr. Versus The State of West Bengal
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prasenjit Biswas
Case No.: C.R.A. 957 of 2013
Advocates for the Appellant: Mr. Niladri Sekhar Ghosh, Mr. Shaharayar Alam.
Advocates for the State: Mr. Arindam Sen, Mr. Imran Ali.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
