LexM. SRINIVASULU versus STATE OF A.P.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
M. SRINIV ASULU
v.
STATE OF A.P.
SEPTEMBER lO, 2007
(DR. ARIJIT PASA Y AT AND D.K. JAIN, JJ.)
Penal Code, 1860-ss. 304B and 498A-Dowry death-Allegation of,
on basis of letters written by deceased - Husband convicted by Trial Court-
C Conviction upheld by High Court-On appeal, held: Reading of the letters
in -the entirety show that there was, in fact, no mention of any demand for
dowry-Courts below apparently picked up one line from one place and
another line from another place and concluded that there was demand of
dowry-Evidence of dowry demand being not substantiated, conviction set
aside-Evidence Act, 1872-s.113B - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961-s.2.
D
Penal Code, 1860-ss.3048 and 498A-Held: The two provisions are
)
'
not mutually inclusive and deal with two distinct offences-Person charged
.•-
and acquitted under s.304B can be convicted under s.498A without that
charge being there, if such a case is made out.
E
Words and Phrases-"soon before her death"-Meaning of-In the
context of s.304B, !PC ands. 113B of the Evidence Act.
Appellant's wife set herself ablaze and died with 100% burn injuries
while undergoing treatment in hospital. According to the prosecution, she
committed the act due to persistent ill-treatment and cruelty meted out towards
F her by Appellant and his mother for more dowry. Trial Court convicted
Appellant and his mother under ss. 304B and 498-A of the IPC. High Court
upheld the conviction of Appellant but acquitted his mother.
In appeal before this Court, the con"viction of Appellant was challenged
on the ground that there was no evidence of any dowry demand. It was contended
G that the letters written by deceased, on which the prosecution placed reliance,
indicated that the dispute was not relating to demand of dowry but was on
account of normal marital discord.
Allowing the appeal, the Coun
H
842
(
M. SRINIV ASULUv. STA TEOF A.P.
843
HELD: 1. A conjoint reading of Section 113B of the Evidence Act and A
Section 304B IPC shows that there must be material to show that soon before
her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. Prosecution has
to rule out the possibility of a natural or accidental death so as to bring it
within the purview of the 'death occurring otherwise than in normal
circumstances'. The expression 'soon before' is very relevant where Section
113B of the Evidence Act and Section 304B IPC are pressed into service. B
Prosecution is obliged to show that soon before the occurrence there was
cruelty or harassment and only in that case presumption operates. Evidence
in that regard has to be led by prosecution. 'Soon before' is a relative term
and it would depend upon circumstances of each case and no strait-jacket
formula can be laid down as to what would co~stitute a period soon before the C
occurrence. It would be hazardous to. indicate any fixed period, and that brings
in the importance of a proximity test both for the proof of an offence of dowry
death as well as for raising a presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence
Act. The expression 'soon before her death' used in the substantive Section
304B IPC and Section 113B of the Evidence Act is present with the idea of
proximity test. No definite period has been indicated and the expression 'soon D
before' is not defined. A reference to expression 'soon after' used in Section
114 {illustration (a)) of the Evidence Act is relevant. It lays down that a Court
may presume that a man who is in the possession of goods soon after the
theft, is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen,
unless he can account for his possession. The determination of the period
which can come within the term 'soon before' is left to be determined by the E
Courts, depending upon facts and circumstances of each case. Suffice,
however, to indicate that the expression 'soon before' would normally imply
that the interval should not be much between the concerned cruelty or
harassment and the death in question. There must be existence of a proximate
and live-link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the
concerned death. If alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has F
become stale enough not to disturb mental equilibrium of the woman
concerned, it would be of no consequence.
[Para IO] (849-D, E, F, G, H; 850-A, BJ
2. Sections 304B and 498A, IPC cannot be held to be mutually inclusive.
These provisions deal with two distExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.