Woman Died Within 4 Walls Of In-Laws' Home And Was Cremated Hurriedly: Rajasthan HC Overturns 22-Yr-Old Acquittal In Dowry Death Case

Overturning a 22-year old acquittal in a dowry death case, the Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court cancelled the bail bonds of the accused father-in-law and the mother-in-law, noting that they failed to explain the circumstances leading to the woman's death since the alleged crime took place within the four walls of their home.The court said that the duo failed to discharge their obligation under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act which lays down that when any fact was especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact was upon him. A division bench of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Madan Gopal Vyas in its order said:"This Court also observes that in the instant case, the crime in question took place within the four-walls of the victim's matrimonial house and therefore, in such a circumstance the burden is upon the in-laws who were present in the house to explain the facts and the circumstances under which the incident in question has taken place, by virtue of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act...This Court observes that in the present case the accused respondents upon the death of the victim, performed her cremation in a hurried manner without informing her family members or police and thereby also preventing the post-mortem of her dead body being conducted which speaks volume of their conduct and manifests intention on their part to concoct the story and to destruct the evidence to shield themselves"Trial court misread evidenceThe bench further observed that the trial court "misread" the evidence and adopted a "hyper-technical approach" while considering the testimonies of the witnesses, which was not desirable in cases relating to social-welfare provision, especially when dowry-deaths was deeply entrenched in Indian society.The Court was hearing the State's appeal filed against the acquittal order passed by the trial court in 2002 in an alleged case of dowry death that took place in 2001 within 3 years of marriage. It was the case of the appellants that the victim was continuously harassed by the accused regarding insufficient dowry. Despite many such dowry demands being fulfilled by the victim's family, the harassment continued, and one day, they were informed that the victim was murdered by the accused and cremated in a hurried manner without informing them, to destroy evidence. It was submitted that even two months before the alleged murder, when the victim visited her maternal family, she mentioned the incessant harassment she was being subjected to. The counsel argued that despite the prosecution story being corroborated by many witnesses, the accused were acquitted on account of benefit of doubt by the trial court. On the other hand, the counsel for the accused submitted that there was no evidence of any demand soon before the victim's death and hence no alleged charges were proved against the accused.Ingredients of dowry death metAfter hearing contentions from both sides, the Court referred to the Supreme Court case of Chabi Karmakar & Ors. v State of West Bengal (2013) in which the 4 ingredients to prove the offence of dowry death were given. These are:1) Death of the victim to be caused by any burns or bodily injury, 2) within 7 years of marriage, 3) soon before her death she was subjected to harassment, 4) such harassment to be in connection with the demand for dowryThe Court perused the records and ruled that in the present case the first two ingredients were fulfilled. In relation to the third ingredient, the Court made a reference to another Supreme Court case of Satbir Singh and Anr. v State of Haryana (2021) in which it was held that the term “soon after” was relative with no straight-jacket formula and the harassment could also be spread over a period. The requirement was that the demand, harassment based on such demand and the date of death should not be too remote. In this light, the Court opined that even though the victim visited the family 2 months before her death when she talked about the continued harassment, it was not too long a time to make the claim stale especially in light of the prolonged cruelty. This thereby established a "proximate and live link” between the cruelty and her consequential death.Hurried and uninformed cremationWith regard to the woman's "hurried and uninformed cremation" the court said that owing to Section 106 of the Act, the burden was upon the accused who were present in the house to explain the facts.It referred to the Supreme Court case of State of Rajasthan v Jaggu Ram and Birendra Sao, Shankar Sao, Shila Devi v State of Bihar in which it was observed that since the cremation took place in the wee hours without informing the parents of the victim or the police, it clearly established that it was done to conceal the real cause of death and thus, it was considered a fit case of Section 106 of the Act. Furthermore, reference was made to the Supreme Court's decision in Uma and anr. v. The...

Woman Died Within 4 Walls Of In-Laws' Home And Was Cremated Hurriedly: Rajasthan HC Overturns 22-Yr-Old Acquittal In Dowry Death Case

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Woman Died Within 4 Walls Of In-Laws' Home And Was Cremated Hurriedly: Rajasthan HC Overturns 22-Yr-Old Acquittal In Dowry Death Case

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers