'Although We Celebrate Our Daughters Winning Cricket World Cup, Equality Still Distant': Calcutta High Court Restores Dowry Death Trial

“Although we are happy and indeed, rejoicing that our daughters have won the World Cup in Cricket recently… the passing away of Rudrika at the age of one and half years reminds us that still we have to go a long way to achieve complete equality for our girl children,” the Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Port Blair observed while setting aside the discharge of a woman's in-laws in a dowry death case and directing that they face trial.The court was hearing a case in which a woman who had allegedly been domestically abused by her in-laws had reportedly killed her one and a half year old daughter, before committing suicide.Justice Apurba Sinha Ray, allowing a revision petition filed by the deceased woman's father, held that the Sessions Court had erred in discharging the parents-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law merely because they were not physically present in Andaman at the time of the incident. The High Court underscored that at the stage of framing charge, courts are required only to see whether prima facie incriminating material exists, and not to meticulously weigh evidence as if conducting a trial.“The Court should confine its consideration only towards prima facie materials on record. The Court is not directed to weigh the admissibility or evidentiary value of the statements recorded under Section 161,” the judge observed.The case concerns the death of Bhawna, who allegedly killed her one-and-a-half-year-old daughter and then died by suicide at Port Blair in July 2021 while her husband was at work. While an initial complaint was lodged by a neighbour, the deceased's father later accused the husband and in-laws of persistent dowry harassment and cruelty, leading to offences under Sections 498A and 304B IPC. After investigation, chargesheets were filed against all family members.However, the Sessions Judge discharged the in-laws, reasoning that they were not residing in Andaman and therefore could not have been involved in the alleged cruelty immediately preceding the incident. Charges were framed only against the husband.Setting aside this reasoning, the High Court held that such a view was “dehors of the record”, noting that witness statements of the deceased's relatives disclosed a continuing pattern of harassment and monetary demands even when Bhawna stayed with her in-laws in Punjab. The statements referred to demands of ₹5 lakh soon after marriage, taunts for not bearing a male child, an “advance demand” of ₹5 lakh if a girl child was born, and later demands escalating to ₹20 lakh.The Court recorded that the deceased was allegedly subjected to mental torture, driven out of her matrimonial home, and allowed to return only after part payment was arranged by her father. Telephonic demands and repeated pressure from in-laws were also alleged.Rejecting the narrow approach adopted by the trial court, Justice Ray said cruelty cannot be confined to physical proximity.“The cruelty cannot be defined in a straitjacket formula or with chosen words,” the Court noted, adding that sustained mental pressure and dowry demands can constitute cruelty even if the accused were not present at the place of occurrence.The High Court also refused to accept the defence argument that the deceased's act of killing her child before suicide showed her own cruelty. Whether her conduct stemmed from “cruel nature or compulsion for not having a male child” is a matter for evidence at trial, the judge said.In a broader social reflection, the Court remarked that despite visible achievements of women in public life, deep-rooted discrimination persists at the household level. Quoting Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, the Court observed: “No society is free until the last damsel in distress is free.”Holding that it was “very difficult to say at this stage that there is no incriminating evidence” against the in-laws, the High Court set aside the discharge order and directed the accused relatives to surrender before the Sessions Court within four weeks, be considered for bail, and face framing of charges under appropriate provisions of law. The revision petition was accordingly allowed.Case: Jagjit Kumar Versus The State & OthersCase No: CRR/54/2024Click here to read order

'Although We Celebrate Our Daughters Winning Cricket World Cup, Equality Still Distant': Calcutta High Court Restores Dowry Death Trial

Srinjoy Das

Tags