Shri Vishnu Prasad And Ors. vs State
2006 Latest Caselaw 894 Del

JUDGMENT

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J

Page 2308

1. At the first instance, Mr Luthra, who appears for the petitioners, submits that the petitioner No. 6 died during the pendency of the present revision petition on 06.05.2002. Therefore, insofar as the petitioner No. 6 is concerned, this revision petition is not being pressed on account of the fact that proceedings against him would stand abated. All the other petitioners have been charged for having committed offences under Sections 498-A/304-B/34 IPC. Mr Luthra argued that insofar as Section 304-B IPC is concerned, the offence is not at all made out even if the entire case of the prosecution is taken to be true and correct at this stage. He submitted that for an offence under Section 304-B IPC to be made out, it is essential that the death of a woman should have been caused either by burns or bodily injuries or by circumstances which were otherwise than normal and that too within seven years of her marriage. Another ingredient, according to Mr Luthra, is that it should also be established that soon before her death, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for or in connection with any demand for dowry. It is only then that the death would fall within the expression dowry death and the offence under Section 304-B IPC would be made out. In the present case, according to Mr Luthra, none of the ingredients of Section 304-B IPC are made out even if the prosecution story is taken to be true and correct. He referred to the opinion of Dr Gaurav Aggarwal who was the Senior Resident, Forensic Medicine, U.C.M.S. & G.T.B. Hospital, Dilshad Garden, Delhi-95 which was filed Along with the charge-sheet. This opinion into the cause of death of the deceased Page 2309 (Asha W/o Vishnu Sharma) is dated 08.02.2000. The opinion into the cause of death reads as under:

Opinion Into Cause Of Death

Received an application from SI Jitender Singh, P.S. Bhajanpura on 8-2-2000 Along with P.M. report No. 02/99 and CFSL report No. CFSL/EE/99(DEL)-293/4813 in original, requesting for opinion into cause of death of Asha W/o Vishnu Sharma as in P.M. report No. 02/99.

After going through the P.M. report and the Chemical analysis of Viscera (CFSL) report, I am of the opinion that the cause of death in this case is "Extensive pulmonary tuberculosis.

2. In the context of this opinion, Mr Luthra submitted that there was no question of Section 304-B IPC being attracted inasmuch as the death was caused due to extensive pulmonary tuberculosis which could not be regarded as an abnormal circumstance. He also contended that even as per the complaint, the last event which could have triggered, if at all, the death of the petitioner on account of dowry demands, took place on 19.01.1998 which is exactly one year prior to the date of death of the deceased (Asha) which took place on 01.01.1999. According to him, there was no proximate and live link between the demand and the death. Therefore, he submitted that on both counts, the offence under Section 304-B IPC is not made out and the petitioners should be discharged of this offence.

3. Mr Pawan Sharma, who appeared for the State, argued that all the ingredients for demand of dowry have been set out in the complaint and other documents accompanying the charge-sheet and the cruelty is all the more aggravated as the deceased was suffering from a disease such as pulmonary tuberculosis and, therefore, the charge has been rightly framed.

4. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the arguments advanced by Mr Luthra have to be accepted. This is because the death which becomes the subject matter of the offence under Section 304-B IPC has to be the result of certain burns or injuries or due to circumstances which are not natural. In the present case, the death that has been caused has been attributed to extensive pulmonary tuberculosis which is something which cannot be attributed to any of the petitioners. It is unfortunate that the deceased contracted this decease and succumbed to it. It would definitely not fall within the description of a death as contemplated under Section 304-B IPC. In this event, it would not be necessary for me to examine the other aspect which was submitted by Mr Luthra with regard to the demands for dowry not being soon before the death and, accordingly, I refrain from doing so.

5. In these circumstances, the charge framed under Section 304-B IPC would have to be deleted and the charges framed against the petitioners under Section 498-A read with Section 34 IPC will remain. This revision petition is partly allowed as indicated above. The matter now be placed before the learned CMM for assignment. The lower court record be sent back immediately.

This revision petition stands disposed of.