The High Court of Chattisgarh has acquitted man of charges under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code after it found the marriage date was uncertain as there was no proof of marriage and statements of deceased's parents were contradictory which concluded that it cannot establish the fact with clarity that death took place within seven years of the marriage.

The appellant herein appealed against the judgment Trial Court that acquitted the accused under charges of Sections 498-A, 304-B read Section 34 and Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the accused persons was that due to the alleged torture and cruelty for not satisfying the demand of dowry the deceased was assaulted and eventually she committed suicide by setting herself ablaze between 10.00 am - 11.00 am on 20-6-1998.

The trial Court has acquitted the accused of the charges for the reason that there is no proof of the date of marriage, therefore, there is no corresponding proof that the death in unusual circumstances due to the demand of dowry has occasioned within seven years of marriage.

The High Court after examining the evidence and listening to the statements of the parents of the deceased it found out that both of them stated that their daughter was married (child marriage) with the accused at of age of 6-7 years and 'gauna' ceremony had taken place 4-5 years prior to the date of death.

What brought the contradiction was the fact that the father stated that when his daughter died she was 25 years of age. If the deceased was 25 years of age at the time of her death as admitted by her father and her marriage had taken place at the age of 6-7 years and gauna ceremony having taken place after 4-5 years, the said gauna ceremony was performed when the deceased was 12-13 years of age. Thus, at the age of 25 years her marriage as well as gauna ceremony had taken place more than 10 years back and, as such, there is no cogent and precise evidence as to the date of marriage.

 The High Court was thus of the view that the prosecution has failed to discharge its initial burden that the death has taken place within seven years of marriage, which is one of the essential prerequisites for constituting an offence under Section 304-B of the IPC as held by the Supreme Court in Baljeet Singh and Another v State of Haryana1.

“17. Having noticed the requirement of law both under Section 304-B IPC as also under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act, we are of the considered opinion that both the courts below erred in drawing an adverse presumption against the accused by shifting the onus on them to prove the date of marriage, which, in our opinion, is not the requirement of law. On the contrary, the law requires the prosecution to establish first by cogent evidence that the death in the case occurred within seven years of the marriage........”

The Court also added that in addition, it has also been seen that there is no mention of demand of any particular item/article/definite amount of cash. The allegation is of general nature that the accused persons were demanding dowry and committing cruelty with the deceased.

it was of the view that after looking at each and every step, it is difficult to reach to a conclusion that the commission of suicide was directly connected with cruelty concerning dowry. There is no evidence which may constitute abetment as defined under Section 107 of the IPC.

The Court said that true it is that if constant cruelty is committed and a woman is tortured to such a situation where she has no other option but to commit suicide, that continuous torture may itself amount to abetment, but such is not the quality of evidence in the present case.

It stated that the deceased was complaining of torture concerning the demand of dowry, but the degree of such torture does not appear to be of such nature that she had no other option in life, but to commit suicide and there was lack of evidence to this effect.

It thus was not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment of acquittal under Section 306 of the IPC also.

The order has been given by Judge Gautam Chourdiya and Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra on 12-07-2019.

Read Order Here:

 

Share this Document :

Picture Source :