The Kerala High Court upheld the conviction under Section 498A IPC, reiterating that consistent and reliable testimony of the victim along with corroboration from supporting witnesses is sufficient to establish cruelty arising from dowry harassment. The matter concerned prolonged physical and mental abuse within marriage, forcing the woman to flee with her children to the police station. The Court notably observed that independent witnesses cannot be expected in domestic violence cases that occur within the confines of a home.
The woman was subjected to persistent harassment and repeated physical violence by her husband due to dowry demands. Despite enduring the abuse for years, she left the matrimonial home only after a particularly severe assault. Along with her children, she sought safety at a police station and later took shelter at her brother’s residence. A formal complaint was subsequently lodged narrating continuous cruelty faced during her marriage.
The accused argued that no independent evidence existed to support the allegations and that statements of relatives should not be treated as credible. It was further contended that the long delay in lodging the complaint created doubt about the allegations. The prosecution maintained that the victim consistently narrated the acts of cruelty, and her account was strongly supported by her siblings and other witnesses. Medical records were also stated to align with her narration of violent assaults.
The Court held that the evidence presented by the victim, her family members and the autorickshaw driver was consistent, trustworthy and free from material contradictions, clearly proving cruelty driven by dowry demands. The Court stated, "The version of the victim regarding physical assault and mental harassment is reliable and remains unshaken. The supporting witnesses strengthen her account, and there exist no inconsistencies in their statements."
The bench emphasised that domestic cruelty occurs in private, and expecting third-party witnesses ignores societal realities. It observed, "The testimony of a woman facing dowry harassment holds strong evidentiary value when it is coherent and credible. Law does not require independent witnesses or mathematical proof for conviction under Section 498A IPC." Rejecting the argument of delayed complaint, the Court noted that victims often wait hoping for change, especially for the future of their children.
The judgment also carried strong social commentary, "Dowry is a corrosive social evil rooted in discrimination and coercion. Violence linked to dowry demands is not a domestic disagreement but a grave offence requiring stern response."
Affirming the conviction under Section 498A IPC, the Court upheld the sentence of six months’ simple imprisonment with a fine of ₹10,000/-, to be paid as compensation to the victim. The revision petition was dismissed and execution of sentence was directed forthwith.
Case Title: Tomon vs. State of Kerala
Case No.: Crl. Rev. Pet No. 890 of 2018
Coram: Justice M.B. Snehalatha
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Anu Krishna T. U.
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Maya M N (Public Prosecutor)
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
