Conviction Under Section 498-A IPC Can Be Upheld Despite Acquittal Under Section 304-B IPC : Supreme Court

In a heartwrenching case, where a girl committed suicide by setting herself on fire due to physical and mental torture committed by her in-laws demanding dowry, the Supreme Court convicted the appellants under Section 306 IPC (abetment of suicide) and Section 498A(cruelty against a married woman)read with Section 34 IPC based on the dying declaration made by her.Her dying declaration even while suffering burn injuries(70-80%) proved critical in the end, even as her own father and all other witnesses had turned hostile in this case.The Court observed that “dying declaration made while suffering burn injuries upto 70-80% would be acceptable if made consciously.” It also summed up the principles related to dying declaration in Vikas v. State of Maharashtra.In this case, the conviction under Section 304B(dowry death) could not be sustained, due to lack of a direct connection between the dowry demand and the death. But at the same time, the Court held that “a conviction under Section 498-A can be upheld despite acquittal under section 304-B IPC since the former has a broader scope.” The Court observed that “Omission to frame charge doesn’t disable court from convicting accused for an offence proved by evidence on record.” Therefore, it held that “accused persons are liable to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC though charge was not framed.”The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar was hearing an appeal against the Karnataka HC judgment which affirmed the sentence given by the trial court for offences punishable under Section 498A, 304B read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.The case revolved around the death of Akkamahadevi, the third daughter of the complainant, Shri Chandappa Gooli. Akkamahadevi was married to the second respondent, accused No.1, in May 2010. The complaint filed by her father alleged that a dowry of Rs. 31,000 and 1.5 tolas of gold was given at the time of the marriage. Subsequently, an additional dowry of Rs. 50,000 and gold was demanded two months after the marriage. It was further alleged that the accused No.1 and his parents subjected Akkamahadevi to physical and mental torture. Unable to bear the suffering, she committed suicide by self-immolation, pouring kerosene and setting herself on fire.A dying declaration, recorded on December 20, 2010, detailed the circumstances of the tragedy. Akkamahadevi succumbed to her burn injuries on December 24, 2010. The prosecution initially registered the case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The charge was later amended to include Section 304B of the IPC.The High Court, in its judgment, found in favor of the prosecution. The court concluded that the dying declaration had been properly recorded and was consistent with other evidence, including the case sheet issued by the treating doctor.The prosecution's case was that the deceased was continuously harassed for dowry and was subjected to physical and mental torture by the appellants. She couldn’t take it any longer and committed suicide by pouring kerosene and setting herself on fire.Dying declaration made while suffering burn injuries upto 70-80% acceptable if made consciouslyThe Court recognized that the deceased had self-immolated due to the relentless torture and abuse inflicted upon her by the appellant. Her dying declaration, marked as Ex.P-45 and recorded by PW-25, highlighted this fact.The Court noted that the physical disability suffered by the deceased, primarily caused by burn injuries ranging from 70% to 80%, would not disqualify her statement if it had been made consciously with an understanding of its consequences. The judgment cited Kamlavva And Anr v. State of Karnataka (2009) 13 SCC 614, which established that even in cases with burn injuries to this extent, dying declarations can be deemed admissible.The Court referred to a constitution bench judgment in Laxman v. State of Maharashtra which emphasized that the Court must decide that the declarant was in a fit state of mind to make the declaration, but where the eyewitnesses' evidence including the evidence of a Magistrate who had recorded the dying declaration to that effect was available, mere absence of doctor's certification as to the fitness of the declarant's state of mind, would not ipso facto render the dying declaration unacceptableIt observed “The juristic theory regarding acceptability of a dying declaration is that such declaration is made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death and when every hope of this world is gone, when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the man is induced by the most powerful consideration to speak only the truth. Notwithstanding the same, great caution must be exercised in considering the weight to be given to this species of evidence on account of the existence of many circumstances which may affect their truth. The...

Conviction Under Section 498-A IPC Can Be Upheld Despite Acquittal Under Section 304-B IPC : Supreme Court

Suraj Parmar

Tags