TARSEM SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [2008] 17 S.C.R. 379 · Decided: 12-12-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

-
[2008] 17 S.C.R. 379 
TARSEM SINGH 
A 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
(Criminal Appeal No. 476 of 2005) 
DECEMBER 12, 2008 
8 
[S.B. SINHA AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860: s.3048 - Conviction under - Held: 
. ~ 
In the absence of proof that any demand of dowry was made 
soon before the death of the deceased, the conviction is not c 
proper - Evidence Act, 1872 - s. 1138. 
Prosecution case was that the deceased-wife was 
tortured on account of bringing insufficient dowry and not 
bearing a child. Deceased was mostly residing with her 
parents. Appellant was employed in Army. A few days 0 
prior to the date of occurrence, appellant-husband wrote 
letters to his father and brother showing his unwillingness 
j 
to keep the deceased with him. It was also stated in the 
letters that during his visit to the village upon obtaining 
leave, deceased should come herself or her parents must E 
get her there. Ten days prior to the date of occurrence, 
I 
deceased came to her parents house and disclosed that 
appellant wrote to his parents asking them to turn her out 
of the house or he would kill her. However as the 
appellant was to come home on leave, father of the 
appellant came to her parents house and asked them to F 
allow deceased to go with him. An apprehension was 
-,.. 
expressed by PW-5, mother of the deceased in regard to 
the said letter. She insisted that she would send deceased 
only with the appellant. However on assurance of father 
of appellant that no such threatening letter was received G 
and that he treated the deceased as his own daughter, she 
was allowed to go with him. After few days, when brother 
-.( 
of the deceased went to enquire about the welfare of 
deceased, he came back and i.nformed that deceased 
379 
H 
380 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 17 S.C.R. 
A was murdered by her iri-laws. An FIR was lodged against · 
the appellant, his sisters and cousin. The charge was 
framed under s.302 IPC and in aifternative under s.3048 
IPC. Trial court convicted all the accused persons under 
s.3048 IPC. High Court, however while dismissing the 
B appeal filed by appell.ant, recorded a judgment of 
acquittal in favour of other accm~ed. 
In the instant appeal, it was contended for the 
appellant that courts below erred in passing judgment of 
conviction and sentence against appellant as the 
c prosecution was not able· to show that any dowry was 
demanded soon before the commission of offence. 
I 
• 
Allowing the appeal, the Court·~ .. 
HELD: 1. It is not in dispute ;that death of deceased 
took place due to consumption 'of organo phosphorus 
D compound. Endocel, which is an insecticide of the 
chloroco compound group, was; recovered. DW-1, who 
examined the deceased before heir death, found her to be 
suffering from pain in her ches,t and breathlessness. 
According to him, she was suffering from pneumonia. 
E Some medicines were allegedly prescribed for the said 
disease. Whether any medicine was administered to her 
or not is not clear. The materials on record are not 
sufficient to bring home the cha~ges under s.3048 IPC. 
[Paras 8 and .9) [385-0-F] 
F 
2. As per the definition of "c1owry death" in s.3048 
IPC and the wording in the presumptive provision of 
s.1138 of the Evidence Act, one of the essential 
ingredients, amongst others, is that the 'woman' must 
have been "soon before her death" subjected to cruelty 
or harassment "for, or in connection with, the demand for 
G dowry". Presumption in terms of s.1138 is one of law. On 
proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes 
obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the. 
accused caused the dowry death. The FIR lodged by PW-
5 emphasized on two reasons of ~arassment, namely, (1) 
H previously on the pretext of bringing in insufficient dowry, 
TARSEM SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
381 
and (2) thereafter for not bearing a child. There is, thus, 
A 
nothing on record to show that any demand of dowry 
was made soon before her death. The cause of action for 
committing the offence appeared to be an ego problem 
on the part of the appellant, namely, the deceased had not 
been coming to her matrimonial home on her OWIJ~ while 
B 
he had been coming to his home on leave. [Paras 12, 14 
and 1S] [387-F-H; 388-F-E] 
..L 
3. The High Court failed to notice that no evidence 
was brought on record to show that the cruelty or 
harassment was meted out to her for bringing insufficient c 
dowry, in absence whereof the ingredients of s.3048 IPC 
cannot be

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