Insistence On Prior Complaint Or Documentary Proof Of Injury To Establish Matrimonial Cruelty “Absurd”: Jharkhand High Court
The Jharkhand High Court has observed that insisting on a prior police complaint regarding assault and torture, or documentary proof of injuries, to establish matrimonial cruelty is “absolutely absurd and unwarranted”.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava made the observation while setting aside an appellate court's decision acquitting a husband of the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court restored his conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.
The complainant, Sushma Devi, married Sanjay Kumar alias Rajesh Kumar in March 2007. She alleged that at the time of their engagement, her father gave ₹2.5 lakh to the accused persons pursuant to their demand. Jewellery, household articles and electronic items worth around ₹3 lakh were also allegedly given.
According to the complainant, after the marriage, her husband and his family expressed dissatisfaction with the cash and gifts and demanded another ₹2 lakh as dowry. She alleged that when the demand was not fulfilled, she was subjected to physical and mental cruelty and was denied sufficient food and other necessities. She further alleged that on April 15, 2007, she was assaulted by her husband, sister-in-law and brother-in-law and driven out of the matrimonial home, following which she took shelter at her parental home in Jamshedpur.
The trial court convicted the husband and the other accused under Section 498A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It sentenced them to three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹10,000 under Section 498A and two years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹5,000 under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
In appeal, the Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the husband of the Section 498A offence, while maintaining his conviction and sentence under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The other co-convicts were acquitted of both charges. The husband thereafter approached the High Court against his conviction under the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complainant also filed a revision challenging the acquittal of the accused.
On examining the evidence, the High Court found that the complainant had given a chronological account of the events and the circumstances in which she was allegedly ill-treated and tortured by her husband. Disagreeing with the approach adopted by the appellate court, the High Court observed:
“It further appears that insistence of the learned appellate court upon lodging any case in respect of assault and torture earlier meted with the complainant or any documentary evidence of injury, is absolutely absurd and unwarranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.The complainant is a highly educated lady and she has stated with date of all the chronological events and the circumstances, wherein she was ill-treated and tortured at the hands of her husband.”
The Court held that the appellate court's findings were against the weight of the evidence and that its insistence on the complainant having lodged an earlier case with the police was unwarranted.
It accordingly set aside the appellate court's judgment insofar as it had acquitted Sanjay Kumar alias Rajesh Kumar of the offence under Section 498A IPC and restored the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court.
Case Title: Sanjay Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar v. State of Jharkhand and Anr.
Case Number: Cr. Revision No. 1465 of 2016
Appearance: Mr. Salona Mittal, Amicus Curiae, for the Petitioner in Cr. Revision No. 1465 of 2016; Mr. J.N. Upadhyay for the Petitioner in Cr. Revision No. 23 of 2017; Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P. and Mr. Arup Dey, A.P.P. for the State; Mr. J.N. Upadhyay and Mr. Mayank Kumar for O.P. No. 2.