ARUN GARG versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 852 · Decided: 29-09-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
ARUN GARG 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. 
SEPTEMBER 29, 2004 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN AND DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860: 
Section 304-B-Dowry death-Cruelty or harassment-"Soon before 
death"-Jngredients of-Accused-husband demanded more dowry from his 
wife (deceased) -She Informed her father on telephone about demand of 
dowry-Deceased again informed her father on telephone about the conspiracy 
to kill her since the demand/or more dowry not met-Subsequently, deceased 
was admitted to hospital in an unconscious state and serious condition-She 
died in hospital due to intake of aluminum phosphide, a poisonous substance-
Courts below convicted the accused-husband under S. 304-B-Correctness 
of-Held: Ingredients of S. 304-B satisfied-Therefore, presumption under 
S. 113-B Evidence Act would follow-Although this is a rebuttable presumption 
yet the accused-husband could not rebut the same-Prosecution, without the 
aid of this presumption, established the case-Hence, conviction under S. 
304-B justified 
Sections 498-A and 304-B-Distinction between-Held: Ss. 498-A and 
304-B are not mutually exclusive-These Sections deal with different and 
distinct offences-A person charged and acquitted under S. 304-B can be 
convicted under S. 498-A even without a specific charge being there. 
Section 304-B-Sentence-lmposition of-Trial court imposed afine of 
Rs. 2, 000 on the accused-High Court enhanced it to Rs. 2 lakhs.:_ 
Correctness of-Held: Fine is not a prescribed punishment under 
S. 304-B-Hence, High Court erred in enhancing the fine instead of setting 
it aside. 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 
Section 3 57 (3)-Compensation-Award by court-Power of-Trial court 
imposed afine of Rs. 2,000 on the accused/or an offence under S. 304-B-
H 
High Court enhanced it to Rs. 2 lakhs with a direction that the same be paid 
852 
ARUN GARG v. STATE 
853 
to the complainant, if recovered-Fine was not a prescribed punishment 
A 
under S. 304-B-But accused contended that the fine be treated as 
compensation under S. 357(3)-Validity of-Held: High Court enhanced the 
quantum of fine without any discussion-There is no finding or observation 
that the complainant suffered any loss or injury-Therefore, imposition of 
fine of Rs. 2 lakhs not warranted-Hence, fine of Rs. 2 lakhs set aside. 
B 
Words & Phrases: 
"Soon before death"-Meaning of-In the context of Section 304-B of 
the Penal Code, 1860. 
According to the prosecution, the appellant's wife died under very 
tragic circumstances within three years of her marriage. The appellant 
c 
was alleged to have administered aluminum phosphide causing the 
unnatural death of the deceased. At the time of marriage, household 
articles and cash were given in dowry. However, the appellant had been 
demanding more dowry and since the demand was not met the deceased 
D 
was being harassed and ill-treated by the appellant and his family 
members. Prior to her death the deceased had made a telephone call to 
her father informing him that the appellant and her in-laws were 
conspiring to kill her. Subsequently, the deceased was admitted to the 
hospital in an unconscious state and serious condition and she died two 
days later. 
The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 304-B of the 
Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo RI for a period of ten 
years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000. The High Court, while confirming 
the conviction of the appellant, enhanced the fine from Rs. 2.000 to Rs. 
2 lakhs. Hence the appeal. 
On behalf of the appellant, it was contended that the deceased was 
not subjected to cruelty and harassment by the appellant or any of his 
relatives "soon before the death" of the deceased; that the interested 
evidence of the parents of the deceased was not supported by independent 
evidence or by any witness from the locality; and that there was no 
demand of dowry "soon before the death" of the deceased. 
On behalf of the respondent, it was contended that as no tine could 
be imposed as part of the punishment, the direction. to a pay a fine of 
E 
F 
G 
H 
854 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
Rs. 2 lakhs should be treated as compensation under Section 357(3) of 
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 
Allowing the appeal in part, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The ingredients necessary for the application of Section 
B 
304-B of the Penal Code, 1860 are: 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
(i) that the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily 
injur

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.