LexAMAR SINGH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2010] 9 S.C.R. 526 AMAR SINGH V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN (Criminal Appeal No. 854 of 2004 etc.) AUGUST 03, 2010 [R.M. LODHA AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: s. 3048 - Dowry death - Held: An offence is made out uls. 3048, if the woman was subjected to C cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demand soon before her death - Mere demand of dowry would not attract provision of s. 3048 - On facts, prosecution proved beyood reasonable doubt that the deceased-wife was tortured by appellant-husband on account of demand of scooter/cash, two D months prior to her death - Prosecution led sufficient evidence to raise presumption uls. 1138 that husband caused dowry death of the deceased - Husband did not rebut the presumption - He was rightly convicted by courts below - However, sentence of life imprisonment imposed on him is E reduced to ten years imprisonment since there was no evidence as to the actual role played by him in the death of deceased - As regards the brother-in-law and mother-in-law, prosecution witness could not state exact act of harassment and torture caused by them to the deceased - High Court F rightly set aside their conviction - Evidence Act, 1872 - ss. 32, 1138 - Crime against women - Dowry death - Sentence/ Sentencing. Evidence Act, 1872: s. 32 - Dying declaration - Dowry death - Statements made by the deceased several times to G her mother and brother regarding the dowry demands made by her husband - Admissibility of, uls.32 - Held: These were statements as to "the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in her death" within the meaning of s.32(1) and are admissible - Penal Code, 1860 - s.3048. H 526 AMAR SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 527 The prosecution case was that the deceased was married to the appellant-accused. She was found dead, under abnormal circumstances, in her in-laws's house within ten months of the marriage. The uncle of the appellant lodged a report that the deceased got engulfed A B in flames when she was boiling water and as a result she died. The father of the deceased lodged a report that the deceased was harassed and humiliated in connection with the demand of dowry by her in-laws; and that on receiving information that she met with an accident, he rushed to the spot and found the body of deceased in c charred condition. The trial court convicted the appellant and deceased's mother-in-law and brother-in-law under Sections 498A and 3048 IPC. The High Court confirmed the conviction of the appellant. It however acquitted the mother-in-law and the brother-in-law. The appeal was filed by the appellant-husband challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 3048 IPC. State also filed appeal against the order of acquittal of the mother-in-law and the brother-in-law. D Partly allowing the accused's appeal and dismissing E the State's appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. Clause (1) of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that statements made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the F circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person's death comes into question, are themselves relevant facts. In the instant case, the cause of death of the deceased was a question to be decided and the statements made by the G deceased before PW-4 and PW-5 that the appellant- accused used to taunt the deceased in connection with demand of a scooter or Rs.25,000/- within a couple of months before the death of the deceased were H 528 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 9 S.C.R. A statements as to "the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in her death" within the meaning of Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act. The prosecution, therefore, was able to establish that soon before her'death the deceased was subjected by the B appellant to taunt in connection with the demand for dowry. [Paras 11, 13) [536-F-G; 537-F-G] 1.2. Section 1138 of the Evidence Act states that when the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon C before her death such woman was subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death. The prosecution in the instant case led sufficient evidence D before the court to raise a presumption that the appellant had caused the dowry dea
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.