LexDINESH versus STATE OF HARYANA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2014] 7 S.C.R. 321 DIN ESH v. STATE OF HARYANA (Criminal Appeal No. 578 of 2011) APRIL 25, 2014 [DIPAK MISRA AND M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 - s. 304-8 - Evidence Act, 1872 - A B s. 113-8 - Suicide committed by married woman within 4 years of marriage - Death caused due to consumption of C pesticide - Conviction of husband-appellant - Justification - Held: Justified - Defence of appellant that death was caused due to some complication at advanced stage of pregnancy, without any basis - Evidence of the witnesses sufficiently established that there was persistent demand for dowry from D the side of the accused persons and for non-fulfilment of their demand, the deceased was being subjected to cruelty and harassment - Proximate connection between cruelty, harassment and death of appellant's wife - Sufficient materials showing that the accused persons started demanding E television and gold chain etc. after marriage and that their demand continued and the parents were not allowed to meet their daughter unless their demands were fulfilled - Appellant guilty of offence uls.304-8 /PC - Presumption contained in s. 113-B of the Evidence Act fully applicable to the facts of the F case. Penal Code, 1860 - s.304-B - Evidence Act, 1872 - s. 113-8 - Dowry death - Requirement of prosecution to prove that soon before death, the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment - Expression "soon before" - Meaning of - Held: G It is a relative term required to be considered under the specific circumstances of each case and no straight jacket formula can be laid down - Determination of the period which can come within term "soon before" left to be determined by 321 H 322 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 7 S.C.R. A courts depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case - In case of dowry death, circumstances showing the existence of cruelty or harassment to the deceased are not restricted to a particular instances but normally refer to a course of conduct - Such conduct may be spread over a B period of time - If cruelty or harassment or demand of dowry is shown to have persisted, it shall be deemed to be "soon before death". The appellant's wife committed suicide within four years of marriage. The death was caused by C consumption of organophosphorus compound. The It was alleged that the deceased was compelled to commit suicide as appellant-accused and his two brothers were persistently harassing her for not bringing dowry to their' satisfaction; and also did not permit the parents of the D deceased to meet her for several months prior to the incident. The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections ·• 498A and 3048 IPC but acquitted his two brothers. In ' E appeal, the High Court affirmed the conviction of appellant by placing reliance upon the evidences of PW.1 (mother of the deceased), PW2 (one of the mediators in the marriage) and PW5 (deceased's father). In the instant appeal, it was contended on behalf of F the appellant that the High Court completely overlooked the most essential ingredient i.e. soon before her death the deceased must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with demand for dowry; and that by no stretch of imagination it could be held that F soon before her death the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with the demand for_ dowry. Dismissing the appeal, the Court G DINESH v. STATE OF HARYANA 323 HELD: 1. Section 304-8 IPC and Section 113-8 of the A Evidence Act, 1872 were inserted by the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986 with a view to combating the increasing menace of dowry death. The legislative intent of enacting these provisions is to curb the menace of dowry death. From a reading of the B aforementioned two provisions i.e. Section 304-8, IPC and Section 113-8 of the Evidence Act, it is evident that the, prosecution must have brought on record /the materials to show that soon before her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. [Paras 10, 11, 12 c and 13] [329-G; 330-D, F-G; 332-8] 1.2. The expression "soon before" is a relative term as held by this Court, which is required to be considered under the specific circumstances of each case and no ,straightjacket formula can be laid down by fixing any time D of allotment. It can be said that the term "soon before" is synonyms with the term "immediately before". The determination of the period
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.