PRADEEP KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [2014] 9 S.C.R. 191 · Decided: 02-07-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 9 S.C.R. 191 
PRADEEP KUMAR 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 292 of 2011) 
JULY 02, 2014 
[SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA AND 
S.A. BOBDE, JJ.] 
A 
8 
PENAL CODE, 1860: ss.304-8, 498A - Dowry death -
Presumption u/s.3048 - Essential ingredients, discussed -
C 
In the instant case, victim-deceased died of burn injuries 
within 9 months of marriage - Dying declaration - In the first 
part of her dying declaration, she stated that it was the case 
of accident, however, in second part, she alleged that her 
husband was harassing her for bringing dowry and doused her D 
in kerosene and set her on fire - Conviction of appellant-
husband by courts below - Challenged - Held: First part of 
the dying declaration was tutored by the husband as was 
apparent from the second part of dying declaration which 
inspired confidence - Evidence of the father of the deceased 
E 
and dying declaration proved that there was demand of dowry 
and harassment soon before her death - There was no reason 
for deceased to falsely implicate her husband - Prosecution 
proved dowry death - No interference called for with the order 
of conviction - Crime against women. 
F 
The prosecution case was that the victim-deceased 
was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection 
with demand of dowry. Nine months after the marriage, 
she received burn injuries. The next day, she made dying 
declaration before the Magistrate. In first part of the said 
G 
dying declaration, she asserted that it was a case of 
accident whereas in the second part, she alleged that her 
husband had been forcing her to fetch Rs. 1 lakh from 
her parents and threatening to kill her if she did not bring 
191 
H 
192 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 9 S.C.R. 
A the money. She declared that her husband doused her 
in kerosene from behind and set her on fire. She died 12 
days after the incident. 
The trial court convicted the appellant-husband 
8 under Sections 304-8 and 498-A, IPC. The High Court 
upheld the conviction. The instant appeal was filed 
challenging the order of conviction. 
qismissing the appeal, the Court 
c 
HELD: 1. PW-7 who conducted the postmortem 
examination on the dead body of the victim-deceased 
stated that there was superficial to deep burns all over 
the body except face, scalp, both legs and feet and a part 
of left upper arm. Pockets of pus were present at some 
0 places. Liver, spleen, kidneys and both lungs were 
congested. In his opinion the cause of death in this case 
was burns which were ante mortem in ordinary cause of 
events. In his cross-examination, PW-7 stated that since 
the body of the deceased had been burnt it was unlikely 
E that marks of the other injuries could be seen. If the 
deceased was sitting in fr~nt of the stove and the stove 
got burst, she could have received injuries on her face 
and scalp which were not there in this case. He agreed 
with the suggestion that if kerosene was poured from 
behind the deceased and she was put on fire there would 
F be injuries on the back side of the deceased. It is possible 
that the deceased could receive burn injuries if on 
account of pinning of the stove the oil and the flame left 
from the stove but in that case also the face and scalp 
should have been burnt which was not there in this case. 
G [Para 12] (201-F-G; 202-A-C] 
2. A perusal of the dying declaration would show that 
the second part of dying declaration inspired confidence 
so as to consider it to be a dying declaration of the 
H deceased. The first part of dying declaration was tutored 
PRADEEP KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA 
193 
by the accused-husband as apparent from the said part 
A 
of the dying declaration. [Para 13] [202-C-D] 
3. PW-6, the mother of the deceased stated that the 
deceased had told her that there was a quarrel in the 
family because the accused had been making a demand 
B 
of Rs. One lakh for .running a piggery farm. The deceased 
had also sent a letter to her father making a demand of 
Rs.5,000/-. PW-8, the father of the deceased also deposed 
with regard to the .demand of the appellant. Although, 
appellant donated blood to save the life of his wife but it 
was of no use as it was too late. The deceased in the 
C 
dying declaration stated that her husband had stated that 
he would hang her to death if his demand for Rs.1 lakh 
was not met by her parents and on 1st March, 1996, her 
husband tried to hang her. The appellant had initially tried 
to set her on fire during the night and when in t

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