Guidelines for Trial of Dowry death cases Punishable Under section 304 B of IPC: Supreme Court

Guidelines for Trial of Dowry death cases Punishable Under section 304 B of IPC: Supreme Court


Reportable


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 1735-1736 OF 2010

SATBIR SINGH & ANOTHER  Vs  STATE OF HARYANA 

Author: N. V. RAMANA, CJI.

Dated:MAY 28, 2021


36. At the cost of repetition, the law under Section 304B, IPC read with Section 113B, Evidence Act can be summarized below:


i. Section 304B, IPC must be interpreted keeping in mind the legislative intent to curb the social evil of bride burning and dowry demand.


ii. The prosecution must at first establish the existence of the necessary ingredients for constituting an offence under Section 304B, IPC. Once these ingredients are satisfied, the rebuttable presumption of causality, provided under Section 113B, Evidence Act operates against the accused. 


iii. The phrase “soon before” as appearing in Section 304B, IPC cannot be construed to mean ‘immediately before’. The prosecution must establish existence of “proximate and live link” between the dowry death and cruelty or harassment for dowry demand by the husband or his relatives.


iv. Section 304B, IPC does not take a pigeonhole approach in categorizing death as homicidal or suicidal or accidental. The reason for such non categorization is due to the fact that death occurring “otherwise than under normal circumstances” can, in cases, be homicidal or suicidal or accidental.


v. Due to the precarious nature of Section 304B, IPC read with 113B, Evidence Act, Judges, prosecution and defence should be careful during conduction of trial.


vi. It is a matter of grave concern that, often, Trial Courts record the statement under Section 313, CrPC in a very casual and cursory manner, without specifically questioning the accused as to his defense. It ought to be noted that the examination of an accused under Section 313, CrPC cannot be treated as a mere procedural formality, as it based on the fundamental principle of fairness. This aforesaid provision incorporates the valuable principle of natural justice “audi alteram partem” as it enables the accused to offer an explanation for the incriminatory material appearing against him. Therefore, it imposes an obligation on the court to question the accused fairly, with care and caution. 


vii. The Court must put incriminating circumstances before the accused and seek his response. A duty is also cast on the counsel of the accused to prepare his defense since the inception of the Trial with due caution, keeping in consideration the peculiarities of Section 304B, IPC read with Section 113B, Evidence Act.


viii. Section 232, CrPC provides that, “If, after taking the evidence for the prosecution, examining the accused and hearing the prosecution and the defence on the point, the Judge considers that there is no evidence that the accused committed the offence, the Judge shall record an order of acquittal”. Such discretion must be utilized by the Trial Courts as an obligation of best efforts.


ix. Once the Trial Court decides that the accused is not eligible to be acquitted as per the provisions of Section 232, CrPC, it must move on and fix hearings specifically for ‘defence evidence’, calling upon the accused to present his defense as per the procedure provided under Section 233, CrPC, which is also an invaluable right provided to the accused. 


x. In the same breath, Trial Courts need to balance other important considerations such as the right to a speedy trial. In this regard, we may caution that the above provisions should not be allowed to be misused as delay tactics. 


xi. Apart from the above, the presiding Judge should follow the guidelines laid down by this Court while sentencing and imposing appropriate punishment.


xii. Undoubtedly, as discussed above, the menace of dowry death is increasing day by day. However, it is also observed that sometimes family members of the husband are roped in, even though they have no active role in commission of the offence and are residing at distant places. In these cases, the Court need to be cautious in its approach.


Bharath L, Advocate

High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore

9844734166

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines To SHOs On Summoning Persons U/S 35 BNSS

  Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines To SHOs On Summoning Persons U/S 35 BNSS High Court of Karnataka Bangalore  Bench: Justice M. Nagaprasanna WP No 15125/2024 (GM-RES) REPORTED  DATE : 19/07/2024 Cause Title- Tavaragi Rajashekhar Shiva Prasad v. State of Karnataka & Ors The Karnataka High Court has issued guidelines drawing a check list to Station House Officers (SHOs) for summoning persons under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by a man calling in question a notice issued by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Amruthalli Police Station under Section 41(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna said, “In the light of the mandate of law under Sections 41 and 41-A of the Cr.P.C., which is now under Section 35 of the BNSS, it becomes necessary to the State to issue guidelines drawing a check list to all those Station House Officers, akin to what other states
Read more

Basic concept of divorce on the ground of mental Cruelty

  Basic concept of divorce on the ground of mental Cruelty IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.70 OF 2015 Thalraj  Vs Jyoti  CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ. DATED : 10th February, 2021.  In the context of marriage, 'mental cruelty' refers to behavior or actions that cause significant emotional or psychological distress to one spouse by the other. Specifically, in cases involving unfounded scandalous allegations against a spouse made in the pleadings or filing of false complaints, such actions can be considered as instances of mental cruelty. When one spouse makes baseless and scandalous allegations against the other in the legal pleadings or files false complaints, it can have a severe impact on the targeted spouse's mental well-being. These actions can lead to humiliation, embarrassment, and emotional trauma. The false accusations can damage the reputation and social standing of the innocent spouse,
Read more

What is the difference between judicial separation and divorce?

What is the difference between judicial separation and divorce? S 10 of Hindu Marriage Act provides for Judicial separation:- (1) Either party to a marriage, may present a petition praying for a decree for judicial separation on any of the grounds specified in sub-section (1) of section 13, and in the case of a wife also on any of the grounds specified in sub-section (2) thereof, as grounds on which a petition for divorce might have been presented.] (2) Where a decree for judicial separation has been passed, it shall no longer be obligatory for the petitioner to cohabit with the respondent, but the court may, on the application by petition of either party and on being satisfied of the truth of the statements made in such petition, rescind the decree if it considers it just and reasonable to do so. S 13 of Hindu Marriage Act provides grounds for Divorce:- S 13 of Hindu Marriage Act provides that  that if decree for judicial separation has been passed between the parties and that there h
Read more