'No Signs Of Deceased Saving Herself': Allahabad High Court Rejects Cooking Fire Theory, Upholds Husband's Conviction In Dowry Death Case

Rejecting the claim of the accused that the deceased woman had accidentally caught fire while cooking, the Allahabad High Court last week upheld the conviction of a man in a 1991 dowry death case. A Bench of Justice Rajnish Kumar upheld the trial court's judgment wherein the accused was convicted under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for committing dowry death of his wife. The Court observed that all the ingredients of Section 304-B IPC were clearly established, and therefore, the presumption under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act was rightly drawn against the accused. "…signs of saving herself by the deceased has also not been found because if she would have caught fire during sprinkling seasoning for vegetables, then she would have cried and tried to save her and the family members present at home or the neighbours could have reached to save her", the Court said, while dismissing the defence theory that the fire started due to 'seasoning' (chaunka lagana) while cooking. The single judge also noted that it was proved by the prosecution that the death of the deceased had occurred within seven years of marriage and was preceded by cruelty in connection with a demand for dowry. The case in brief As per the prosecution's case, the deceased was married to the appellant (Jai Shankar Shukla) in 1990, about a year before the incident (dated June 11, 1991). Though dowry was given as per the complainant's capacity, the appellant and his mother had been demanding ₹5,000 for the past two months before the incident. When the complainant visited his daughter's matrimonial home and expressed his inability to pay, he was threatened with consequences and not allowed to meet her. Thereafter, on June 11, 1991, a villager informed the father of the deceased that his daughter had been burnt and taken to a hospital. When he saw the burnt dead body of his daughter, he alleged that she had been burnt by her in-laws due to non-fulfilment of the dowry demand. Following an investigation and a trial, the appellant was convicted under Section 498-A and 304-B IPC, and he was sentenced to jail term for 10 years. Importantly, during the trial, the father of the deceased (PW-1) initially supported the prosecution's case in his examination-in-chief recorded in 1992; in his cross-examination two years later, he retracted much of his earlier testimony. Arguments Challenging his conviction, the appellant-accused moved the HC, arguing that no witness, including the father and mother, had supported the prosecution's case and that since the deceased had suffered 100% burn injuries as per the postmortem report, therefore, she could not have been in a position to speak. It was suggested that the deceased had caught fire accidentally while preparing food, and a written report was submitted by the deceased's father-in-law on the same day, alleging that the fire started when the deceased sprinkled seasoning in the pan, igniting the thatch roof. It was also claimed that she was wearing a nylon saree, which caught fire, and she died en route to the hospital. On the other hand, the Additional Government Advocate submitted that the appellant had been rightly convicted. It was argued that while the accused had stated in his statement that the burning was due to sprinkling of seasoning (Chauk lagane se), there was no evidence to support this claim. It was submitted that since 100% burn injuries were found, and if it had been due to the burning of thatch, the deceased must have tried to save herself at the start of the fire, but there is no such evidence. It was also submitted that the presence of a kerosene smell on her body was also noted. High Court's observations and order At the outset, dealing with the fact that the mother and the father of the deceased had turned hostile, the Court noted that their examination-in-chief was found to be reliable and thus, as per the settled law, their evidence cannot be discarded as a whole, and relevant parts thereof which are admissible in law, can be used by the prosecution or the defence. The Court added that his contradictory statements, due to pressure or for some other reason, could not be denied. On the point of presumption of guilt under Section 113B, the Court referred to the Apex Court's 2006 ruling in the case of Ram Badan Sharma Vs. State of Bihar, wherein it was held that factors, when ingredients of Section 304B IPC are proved by reliable and cogent evidence, then the presumption of dowry death under section 113-B of the Evidence Act arises. Now, coming to the facts of the case, the Court noted that PW-1 (father of the deceased) had admitted the demand for dowry, not only on the basis of hearsay but also from his own experience. Though he resiled in cross-examination, his examination-in-chief was consistent with...

'No Signs Of Deceased Saving Herself': Allahabad High Court Rejects Cooking Fire Theory, Upholds Husband's Conviction In Dowry Death Case

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags