ARVIND SINGH versus STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [2001] 3 S.C.R. 218 · Decided: 26-04-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: U.C. BANERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
ARVIND SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF BIHAR 
APRIL 26, 200 I 
B 
[UMESH C. BANERJEE AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.] 
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 302, 304-B and 498-A. 
Dowry death-Husband and o(her family members accused-Conviction 
C by trial court-Appeal-Charge of husband converted by High Court from 
Section 304-B to 302-No substantial evidence. to implicate the accused 
husband-Conviction set aside. 
Dowry death-Bride burning-Finding of High Court that FIR was 
interpolated with regard to demand of dowry-Acquittal of accused-Held 
D calls for no interference. 
E 
Cruelty-Acts of husband and relatives-Charge of cruelty-Need for 
evidence. 
Evidence Act, 1872: Section 32. 
Dying declaration-'-Veracity-Ascertainment of-Bride burning-
Dec/aration of deceased wife-Made few minutes before death-Declaration 
made by deceased to her mother inculpating husband and in-laws-No 
medical evidence suggesting that deceased was fit to make statement-
F Testimony of mother not corroborated-Held dying declaration was not 
worthy of credence. 
· 
The Appellant along with other three ~embers of his family was 
prosecuted under Sections 304B, 498A/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 
18()0; The prosecution case was that the accused persons tortured the wife of 
G appellant by making demands of dowry. Since demands could not be fulfilled 
the accused persons conspired together and ultimately killed the wife of 
appellant by burning her. The evidence in the case was that the mother of the 
deceased was informed about the daughter's burn injury at night The parents 
arrived in the morning and found the daughter in bed room with excessive 
H bum injuries. The deceased made a dying declaration to the mother that the 
218 
ARVIND SINGH v. STATE OF BIHAR 
219 
in-laws and the husband on a conjoint move poured kerosene on her and threw A 
a lighted match stick so as to cause burn inJuries. Immediately after this 
lliatement the deceased passed away without any medical assistance. Tlie trial 
court convicted and sentenced the accused persons of the offences charged. 
On apJ>eal High Court set aside the conviction and sentience of three accused 
viz. father-in-law, the mother-in-law and brother-in-law under Section 304B B 
read with Section 34 as also under Section 120B but maintained their 
conviction under Section 498A. While setting aside the conviction of these 
three accused persons the High Court acceJ>ted the contention of the accused 
persons that from a bare reference to the FIR it would appear that the 
Investigating Officer by making interpolation has added the allegation with 
regard to demand of dowry. The High Court came to the conclusion that there C 
was no evidence that prior to the date of occurrence, there was any demand 
for dowry by accused 1•ersons. So far as the a1•1•ellant husband is concerned 
the High Court came to the conclusion that his conviction ought to be 
converted from Section 304B to Section 302 and sentenced him to 
imprisonment for life besides the conviction and sentence of 3 years under 
Section 498A. 
D 
In appeal to this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellant that 
(i) the High Court committed not only a grave error of law in converting the 
charge under Section 304B to 302 but also proceeded totally against even 
the entire tone of the evidence on record; (ii) having recorded a finding that E 
the demand for dowry was interpolated and inserted in the FIR, it was unsafe 
to rely on the testimony of the mother of the deceased. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. The conviction and sentence imposed on the husband-apflellant 
cannot be sustained. The evidence,is not sufficient enough to reach an F 
irresistible conclusion of the involvement of the husband as the murderer 
or even being charged with an offer.ce under Section 304B IPC. (233-F] 
2. It is undoubtedly a social and heinous crime to have the wife burnt 
to death but without any proper and reliable evidence, the law court can not G 
by itself also Justify its conclusion in the matter of involVement of the 
husband~ Direct evidence may not be available but circumstantial evidence 
/ 
with reasonable probity and without a snap in the chain of events would 
certainly tantamount to a definite evidence about the involvement but not 
otherwise. No evidence is available in the matter. The defence story of early 
morning stove burst by reason of warming up of milk from the kitchen has H 
220 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] 3 S.C.R. 
A not been 

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