NARESH KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

Citation: [2014] 11 S.C.R. 391 · Decided: 14-11-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
[2014] 11 S.C.R. 391 
NARESH KUMAR 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1266 of 2013) 
NOVEMBER 14, 2014 
[T.S. THAKUR, ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND 
R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860: s.304-8 - Dowry death - Death by 
burn injuries - Held: There was consistent evidence to prove 
C 
harassment for dowry by husband soon before death of the 
victim-deceased - Acquittal of in-laws would not exonerate the 
husband as he is not only primarily responsible for safely of 
his wife, he is also expected to be conversant with her state 
of mind more than any other relative - Failure to give an 
D 
explanation or giving of false explanation can be taken as 
additional circumstance against him - Suicide note to the 
effect that no one should be held responsible is not enough 
to exonerate the husband - If the wife commits suicide by 
setting herself on fire, preceded by dissatisfaction of the 
E 
husband and his family from the dowry, the inference of 
harassment against the husband may be patent - Conviction 
of husband by courts below upheld. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
F 
Held: 1. There was consistent evidence on record to 
prove harassment for dowry soon before the death of the 
deceased. The deceased died within 10 months of the 
marriage. According to PW3, father of the deceased, after 
three months of the marriage, the deceased informed him 
G 
that the appellant and his family were harassing her for 
dowry. He, along with PW-12, went to the house of the 
appellant and requested them not to harass her. Again, 
391 
H 
392 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 11 S.C.R.. 
A three days before the occurrence, the deceased informed 
her father about the dowry harassment on which her 
uncle PW-12, along with his wife, went to the house of 
the accused and brought the 'deceased to her parental 
home. The appellant took her away on the threat of 
B divorce and on the next day, she died of burn injuries. 
Similar version has been given by PW-10 and PW-12. 
There was live and proximate link between the demand 
of dowry and death. In these circumstances, it cannot be 
held that there was no evidence of demand of dowry 
c "soon before the death". [Para 9] [395-F-G; 396-A-B] 
2. The tenor of the suicide note clearly showed that 
the deceased was in helpless condition and she found 
no other way to come out of the situation. The suicide 
. note cannot be taken to be encyclopedia of the entire 
D situation in which the dece~sed was placed. Mere 
mentio111 that nobody may be held responsible, while also 
stating that all the doors were closed for her and she had 
no other way available (except to leave the world), is not 
enough to exonerate the appellant. As regards the claim 
E for parity of the case of the appellant with his mother and 
brother who have been acquitted, the High Court rightly 
found his case to be distinguishable from the case of his 
mother and brother. The husband is not only primarily 
responsible for safety of his wife, he is expected to be 
F conversant with her state of mind more than any other 
relative. If the wife commits suicide by setting herself on 
fire, preceded by dissatisfaction of the husband and his 
family from the dowry, the inference of harassment 
against the husband may be patent. [Paras 10, 12] [396-
G F, G; 397-E-G] 
Hira Lal and Ors. vs. State (Govt. of NCT) Delhi 2003 
(1) Suppl. SCR 734: (2003) 8 SCC 80 - relied on. 
' 
Manohar Lal vs. State of Haryana AIR (2014) SC 2555 
H - referred to. 
• 
NARESH KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA 
393 
Case Law Reference: 
A 
AIR (2014) SC 2555 
referred to 
Para 7 
2003 (1) Suppl. SCR 734 
relied on 
Para 10 
/ 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
B 
No. 1266 of 2013. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 12.03.2013 of the High 
Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal 
No. S-736-SB of 2003. 
G.C. Shahpuri, Surinder Singh, Balbir Singh Gupta for the 
Appellant. 
Kamal Mohan Gupta for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J. 1.This appeal has been 
preferred against Judgment and Order dated 12th March, 2013 
c 
D 
of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in 
Criminal Appral No.S-736-SB of 2003 upholding the conviction 
E 
of the appellant under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code 
("IPC") and sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment tot seven years. 
2. Case of the prosecution is that the appellant was 
married to the deceased Rekha Rani on 7th July, 2000. After F 

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