LexUNDAVALI NARAYANA RAO versus STATE OF A.P.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 11 S.C.R. 660
A
UNDAVALI NARAYANA RAO
~
..
v.
STATE OF A.P.
(Criminal Appeal No. 594 of 2004)
B
JULY 24, 2009
[DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND DR. B.S.
CHAUHAN, JJ.]
..
Penal Code, 1860 - s.498A - Wife committing suicide
\-
c -
Conviction of a9cused-husband under s. 498A -
Justification of - Held: The conviction was justified - There
was coercive harassment and torture for dowry - No attempt
was made by husband or mother-in-law to inform family
members of deceased about the death - Dead body was
D hurriedly cremated Without any autopsy having been
conducted - No medical evidence was led by defence to
,4...~
establish their claim that wife was ailing from before and died
of natural death - Delay in launching criminal prosecution
was explained by prosecution - Minor child of accused
E deposed falsely to save her father and other family members
and she was merely a "tutored witness" - No cogent reason
to take a view contrary to the one taken by the courts below.
According to the prosecution, the appellant was a
F
habitual drunkard who continuously harassed his wife
~
and subjected her to mental and physical torture for more
dowry, which forced her to commit suicide. The appellant
was convicted by the Courts below under section 498A
IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
2 years.
G
The conviction of appellant was challenged before
this Court on grounds that the appellant's wife died of a
~ -,.
natural death resulting from stomach ache; that in this
regard the Courts below erred in disbelieving DW1, the
H
660
UNDAVALI NARAYANA RAO v. STATE OF A.P.
661
minor daughter of appellant, who deposed in favour of A
the appellant; that pursuant to execution of an agreement
between the parties, there was no complaint either of
harassment or cruelty; that no demand had ever been
made for dowry and that there was inordinate delay in
lodging the criminal case by family of the deceased. B
Hence the present appeal.
-
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
-of
HELD: 1. Cruelty has been °def.ined by the explanation
added to Section 498A IPC itself; The
0 bas.ic ingredients c
of Section 498A are cruelty and har~ss,ment. The charge
"
0
0
•
.
under Section 498A can be broughf home if the essential
ingredients either ·in ·~lause. (a), {rr
0
(b) ci'r both are found
duly established. [PC'll"a
011} [669-C-D,, H; 670-A]
,
"
0
•'
D
S. Hanumantha Rao v. S. Ramani AIR 1999 SC 1318;
.... ~
V. Bhagat v. Mrs. D. Bhagat AIR 1994 SC 710; Mohd.
Hoshan v. State of A.P. (2002) 7 SCC 414; Smt. Raj Rani v.
State (Delhi Administration) AIR 2000 SC 3559; Sushi/
Kumar Sharma v. Union of India AIR 2005 SC 3100 and E
•
GirdharShankar Tawade v. State of Maharashtra AIR 2002 SC
2078, referred to.
2.1. In the instant case, it is evident from the evidence
,;,
on record that dowry passed on to the appellant
consisting of Rs.50,000/- cash, Ac.3.00 of wet land and F
Ac.6-00 of mango tope along with 50 tolas of gold and 2
kgs. of silver. It is also revealed in the evidence on record,
that after about two years of the marriage, the deceased
was being harassed by the appellant as well as by his
mother. There was a demand that the property in her G
... , ,I-
name be sold and deceased should bring more money
from her parents. The deceased was beaten by the
appellant and was forced out of the house. The deceased
complained to her mother and other family members that
the appellant was always drunk and ill-treated her. H
662
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2009] 11 S.C.R.
~
However, by the intervention of the elder members of the
...
A
community, the matter was resolved and an agreement
dated 14.3.1990 was executed to the effect that the
immovable properties owned by the husband and wife
would be preserved for their children and none of them
B would alienate any part of any property in their names.
However, they would have a right to enjoy its usufruct.
After sometime, the appellant and his mother started
pressurising the deceased to alienate the land in
..
...
contravention of the said agreement and she should
c bring money from her parents. The appellant's mother
also threatened the deceased that in case she did not
agree for the said transfer of land, she would remarry her
son with another girl. The deceased left her matrimonial
home, however she was taken back by her family
D members and in consultation with the family members of
the appellant and by interExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.