The single-judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that in the event, a dowry demand has been made soon before the unnatural death of the deceased, the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act can be drawn. The necessity to draw the said presumption arises because the offense is committed within the domestic confines of the household, there can be little direct evidence in such cases.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the deceased was married to the appellant in 2007 and it was alleged by the brother of the deceased that it was informed by her that the appellant and his brother used to subject her to cruelty. Then, he got information that his sister had been done to death by forcibly administering poison by the appellant and his brother and sister. Thereafter, the charge sheet was filed under Sections 328/34 and 304B of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court acquitted the brother and sister of the appellant and convicted the appellant.
Contentions of the Appellant
The appellant submitted that there exists no eye witness to the incident and the presumption of dowry is drawn on sketchy and insufficient evidence of demand of dowry. Also, there was no allegation of dowry demand in the FIR.
Contentions of the State
The state submitted that the presumption of dowry death has been established under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act as the death was seen within seven years of the marriage and the informant's mother made explicit mention of the dowry demand.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble court observed that the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act may be applied if the dowry demand was made shortly before the deceased's death. Since the crime is done within the domestic boundaries of the family, it is necessary to make the said presumption because there is typically little direct evidence available in these situations.
It was furthermore observed that the post-mortem report states that the deceased passed away as a result of poisoning. Since the other accused individuals have been found not guilty of the allegations, the prosecution's case of forcing the administration of poison has been dismissed. Since there isn't a direct eyewitness account of the poisoning incident, Section 304 B of the IPC has been used to obtain a conviction based on the presumption of dowry death.
The court relied upon the judgment titled Supriyo Mandal Vs State of West Bengal.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the opinion that the presumption of dowry death cannot be drawn and the court set aside the conviction under Section 304-B.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court allowed the appeal.
Case title: Munshi Tudu Vs The State of Jharkhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Case no.: Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 286 of 2012
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Ms. Priya Shrestha, Special P.P.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com:
Picture Source :
