LexDAVINDER SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2014] 9 S.C.R. 208 DAVINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Criminal Appeal No. 684 of 2011) JULY 02, 2014. [SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA AND S.A. BOBDE, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: s.3048 - Presumption under - C Essential ingredients - Discussed - In the instant case, the victim-deceased was harassed by accused-husband on account of dowry demand - Victim informed her brother a day prior to incident about the torture in connection with dowry - The next day, when the brother and maternal uncle of the D victim went to the matrimonial home of deceased they found her dead body in burnt condition - Courts below convicted accused-husband u/s.3048 - On appeal, held: The statements of brother and maternal uncle showed that the death took place within seven months of marriage - Death E was due to burns i.e. not in normal circumstances - The statements of brother and maternal uncle were specific as they were eye witnesses - In their statements, they specifically stated about the harassment in connection with demand of dowry - Victim died within seven months of marriage - She F a/so telephonical/y complained about harassment - The prosecution thus proved that there was harassment in connection with dowry soon before death of the victim - The prosecution was successful to prove the ingredients of s. 304- 8 /PC - Trial court rightly presumed that the accused had G caused the dowry death of the victim - No interference with the order of conviction - Crime against women. H Prosecution case was that the appellant was married to the victim-deceased 6-7 months before the date of 208 DAVINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 209 incident. The deceased was harassed by appellant- A husband and her in-laws on account of dowry demand. A day prior to the incident, the deceased telephoned her brother, PW-2 and informed about the torture and harassment in connection with dowry. PW-2 went to the house of deceased along with his maternal uncle, PW-3 B to enquire about the welfare of the deceased. They came back by saying that they would come next day along with some respectable person to settle the dispute. On fateful day, when PW-2 with PW-3 and· one 'TS' C who was mediator in arranging the marriage of the !.- deceased with the appellant reached the matrimonial house of the deceased, they heard screams from the _ roof. They heard mother-in-law of the deceased saying -that the deceased should not be spared. They went upstairs and found the dead body of the deceased lying D in the bathroom in a burnt condition. A plastic can and match box was also found near her body. The trial court convicted the appellant under section 304-B IPC. The High Court confirmed the order of E 1 conviction. The instant appeal was filed challenging the order of the conviction. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.· For the purpose of Section 304-B, IPC a F presumption can be raised only on proof of the following essentials: Death of woman has been caused by burns or bodily injury or not under normal circumstances. The said death have occurred within seven years of her marriage. The woman was subjected to cruelty or G harassment by her husband or his relatives. Such cruelty - or harassment was for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry and she was meted out with such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death. [Para 10) -[216-C-F) H 210 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R. A Kaliaperumal vs. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 2003 SC 3828: 2003 (3) Suppl. SCR 1; Hira Lal & Others Vs. State (Govt. of NCT), Delhi (2003) s sec-so: 2003 (1) Suppl. SCR 734 ..,... relied on. 8 _ i. In the instant case, the statements of PW-2 and PW-3 showed that the death took place within seven months of marriage. Admittedly, death of the deceased was due to burns i.e. not in normal circumstances. The statements of the PW-2 and PW-3 were specific as they C were eye witnesses. In their statements they specifically stated about the harassment in connection with demand of dowry. Deceased died within seven months of marriage. She also telephonically complained about harassment. The prosecution thus proved that there was harassment in connection with dowry soon before death D of the victim. The prosecution was successful to prove the ingredients of Section 304-B IPC; The trial court rightly presumed that the accused had caused the dowry death of the victim. [Para 12, 13, 14] [219-E-H; 220-A] E Case Law Refer
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.