SUNIL BAJAJ versus STATE OF M.P.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 51 · Decided: 11-10-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: U.C. BANERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

SUNIL BAJAJ 
A 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. 
,,, 
OCTOBER 11, 2001 
[UMESH C. BANERJEE AND SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.] 
B 
Penal Code, 1860. 
·Section 304-B-Conviction-Essential ingredients-Held, deat~ o.f woman ' 
othenvise than under normal Circumstances within 7 years o.f marriage- . c 
Deceased must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment soon be.fore her 
death and such cruelty or harassment must be for or in connection with demand 
for dowry-Deceased subjected to mental cruelty be.fore her death-Demand 
for dowry not established-Held, under the facts and circumstances, conviction 
· under section 304-B set aside. 
D 
Criminal Trial-Appreciation of evidence-Dowry death-Held, greater 
care and caution required for scrutinizing evidence and arriving_ at conclusion-
Dowry death shall be deemed upon establishment of essential ingredients-
Section 304-B. 
E 
Prosecution alleged that appellant-accused married S, and was ill-
). 
treating and harassing her for dowry, and subjected her to cruelty with 
the result that she cominitted suicide within seven years of marriage. Trial 
Court convicted appellant under Section 304-B IPC which was confirmed 
in appeal by the High Court. Hence, the present appeal. 
F 
Appellant contended that conviction was bast!d on statements of 
motivated and interested witnesses, being close relatives of the deceased; 
that economic condition of appellant was much better· than that of parents 
of deceased and there was no evidence to show as to how parents of 
deceased raised money and whether they paid money at all to appellant 
G 
•• 
as dowry; that prosecution failed to establish the demand of dowry and 
that deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death for and in 
connection with demand of dowry to attract offence under Section 304-
B IPC; and' that letters written by deceased did not support the case of 
prosecution. 
H 
51 
52 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
B 
HELD : 1. In order to convict an accused for an offence under· 
Section 304~B IPC, the following essentials must be satisfied-(i) the death 
of a woman must have been caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise 
than under normal circumstances; (ii) such death must have occurred 
within 7 years' of her marriage; (iii) soon before her death, the woman 
must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or by 
relatives of her husband; and (iv) such cruelty or harassment must be for 
or in connection with demand of dowry. It is only when the aforementioned 
ingredients are established by acceptable evidence .such death shall be 
C 
called "dowry death" and such husband or his relative shall be deemed 
to have caused her death, even in the absence of evidence to prove these 
aspects. Hence, there is need for greater care and caution, having regard 
to the gravity of the punishment ·prescribed for the said offence, in 
scrutinizing the evidnece and in arriving at the conclusion as to whether. 
D 
all the abQve mentioned ingredients of the offence are proved by the 
prosecution. [55-B-E; 55-G; H] 
E 
F 
G 
H 
·2. In the instant case, it is clear that -(i) there is no evidence of 
demand of dowry or subjecting the deceased to cruelty for, or in connection 
with dowry other than general, vague and inconsistent statements of 
interested and motivated witnesses being the parents and brother of the 
deceased; (ii) not a single member, neighbour or a relative of parties has 
conie forward to speak about 'subjecting the deceased to cruelty by the' 
appellant in relation to demand of dowry; (iii) the deceased 'talking on 
telephone with her mother on 27.8.1995, a day earlier to her death, itself 
is not proved; (iv) that the appellant and his family members were wen-· 
placed financially and the parents of deceased having big family, were not 
that comfo~table fi~ancial!y; (v) there was no demand of dowry at the time 
of marri'age .in 1991; in letter Exhibit D/3 dated 9.3:1995 w'ritten by 
deceased to iier'father "and brother, and in her letter Exhibit P/9, said to 
havlbeen wfitten soon before her death; (vi) there is no evidence as to 
how father of deceased arranged money' af Rs.20,000 or 10,000 (vii) there 
are materiai · contra(lictions and ~eriou~ omissions in the statements of 
tamily members of deceased; (viii)
1 decea'sed was subjected to ~entat' 
cruelty on account of appellant bringing girls of bad charactor to his house 
but there is nothing to "establish that this

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