Page 1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1893 OF 2013 (Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2098 of 2011)

ASHA & ANR.                 ... APPELLANTS

               VERSUS

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND    ... RESPONDENT

WITH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1894 OF 2013 (Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2924 of 2011)

J U D G M E N T

V. Gopala Gowda, J.

These appeals have been filed by the appellants  

against the common impugned judgment and order dated  

07.01.2011  of  the  High  Court  of  Uttarakhand  at

Page 2

2

Nainital in Criminal Appeal No. 1931 of 2001(Old no.  

1060 of 1998), whereby the High Court dismissed the  

appeal of the appellants and upheld their conviction  

and sentence of 10 years R.I. under Section 304B of  

the Indian Penal Code (in short “the IPC”) awarded by  

the trial court. In Criminal Appeal No. 1893 of 2013  

the appellants are the sisters-in-law of the deceased  

and in Criminal Appeal No. 1894 of 2013 the appellant  

is the father-in-law of the deceased. During pendency  

of the appeal before the High Court, the co-accused,  

Lilawati, the mother-in-law of the deceased had died,  

therefore, the case abated against her.  

2.The brief facts of the case are stated hereunder to  

appreciate the correctness of the findings recorded  

by both the trial court and the High Court on the  

charges framed against the accused persons under  

Sections 302/34, 304B and 306 of the IPC and also  

to  find  out  as  to  whether  the  appellants  are  

entitled for the relief as prayed by them.

3.The deceased, Bhagwati Devi was married to Satish  

Chandra (the brother of the appellants in Criminal  

2

Page 3

3

Appeal  No.  1893  of  2013)  on  13.06.1991.  The  

deceased  died  due  to  burn  injuries  in  her  

matrimonial house on 18.07.1993, around two years  

after marriage. The co-accused, the father-in-law  

of  the  deceased,  Nitya  Nand  (the  appellant  in  

Criminal Appeal No. 1894 of 2013) lodged a report  

(Ex.Ka.1) on 18.07.1993 with the patwari stating  

that  his  daughter-in-law  committed  suicide  by  

burning herself at about 10.00 a.m. He alleged in  

the  aforesaid  report  that  the  deceased  burnt  

herself to death while he had gone to the market  

and his wife and their daughters were away in the  

jungle  for  cutting  grass.  On  19.07.1993,  the  

complainant, Mahesh Chandra (P.W. 5), the brother  

of  the  deceased  lodged  another  report  to  the  

patwari making allegations against the appellants  

herein and the mother-in-law of the deceased, upon  

which FIR No.1/93 dated 19.07.1993 was registered  

against them. The accused persons were arrested and  

sent  to  judicial  custody  on  22.07.1993.  On  

16.10.1993,  the  police,  after  investigation,  

submitted  the  charge  sheet  before  the  Chief  

3

Page 4

4

Judicial Magistrate, Almora. The case was committed  

to the Court of the Sessions Judge on 23.03.1994  

and the accused were charged under Sections 302/34  

and 304B of the IPC and in the alternative, Section  

306  of  the  IPC.  Both  the  prosecution  and  the  

defence  witnesses  were  examined  to  prove  the  

charges  against  the  accused  persons  and  to  show  

that they are not guilty of the offences alleged  

against them. The trial court, on appreciation of  

evidence  on  record,  vide  its  judgment  and  order  

dated 01.06.1998, found the appellants  guilty of  

offence under Section 304B of the IPC and they were  

sentenced  to  10  years  R.I.  The  appellants  were  

acquitted for offences under Sections 302 and 306  

of the IPC. The appellants filed Criminal Appeal  

No. 1931/2001 (Old no.1060/1998) before the High  

Court.  The  High  Court  dismissed  the  appeal  and  

upheld the judgment and order of the Sessions Court  

vide  its  common  judgment  and  order  dated  

07.01.2011. Aggrieved by the same they preferred  

these  appeals,  urging  certain  grounds  and  legal  

contentions.

4

Page 5

5

4.The learned Sessions Judge relied upon the evidence  

of  the  prosecution  witnesses  to  convict  the  

appellants. The prosecution examined 9 witnesses in  

support of the case. P.W 3, Bhuvan Chandra and P.W  

5, Mahesh Chandra are the brothers of the deceased.  

According to P.W. 3, his brother Deepak Chandra-the  

P.W.7  had  gone  to  the  matrimonial  house  of  the  

deceased, when the four accused persons demanded  

30,000/-  stating  that  the  deceased  had  brought  

less dowry and threatened to send her back to their  

house  if  they  did  not  pay  the  amount  demanded.  

P.W.3 had written a letter (Ex. Ka.3) on 28.6.1993  

to his parents informing them about the demand of  

the in-laws of the deceased for 30,000/- and that  

due to this he withdrew 4,000/- and sent it to his  

father through a villager to give it to his sister,  

the  deceased  herein.  He  also  stated  that  the  

deceased-Bhagwati had told his wife and his father  

that she was being harassed at her in-laws house  

because she had brought less dowry. P.W.4, Nanda  

Devi, the mother of the deceased also alleged that  

5

Page 6

6

the deceased was harassed by the accused persons  

for  bringing  less  dowry.  She  deposed  that  the  

accused  persons  gave  her  less  food  and  did  not  

allow her to wear the clothes which were given to  

her at the time of the marriage. P.W.5, the brother  

of the deceased deposed that his sister had told  

him that her in-laws taunted her about being from a  

poor  family  and  for  having  brought  less  dowry.  

P.Ws.3,  4  and  5  alleged  that  the  accused  burnt  

Bhagwati to death. P.W.6, Dr. Naval Kishore Pandey,  

the doctor who conducted the post mortem of the  

deceased deposed before the trial court that she  

had died due to 90% of burn injuries. P.W.7, Deepak  

Chandra, another brother of the deceased deposed  

before the court that he had gone to his sister’s  

matrimonial  house  in  May,  1993  when  the  accused  

persons demanded 30,000/- and said that dowry was  

not fulfilled by the parents of the deceased and  

they had simply given a sewing machine. He also  

stated that the accused persons had misbehaved with  

his sister Bhagwati in his presence.

6

Page 7

7

5.The trial court examined the evidence on record and  

held that the charge under Sections 302/34 of the  

IPC against the accused persons is not made out,  

but instead the accused created the circumstances  

and  compelled  the  deceased  to  commit  suicide.  

Further, it has held that the prosecution has been  

able  to  prove  the  case  i.e.  the  charge  under  

Section  304B  of  the  IPC  beyond  reasonable  doubt  

that  the  demand  for  dowry  that  was  made  by  the  

accused persons subsequent to the marriage and soon  

before the death of the deceased amounts to ‘dowry  

death’.  As  regards  Section  306  of  the  IPC,  the  

trial court held that there is no direct evidence  

regarding abetment to suicide by the deceased and  

instead  reiterated  that  the  accused  created  the  

circumstances  for  committing  suicide  and  since  

evidence was not led under Section 306, the trial  

court  held  that  the  accused  were  liable  to  be  

acquitted  for  offence  under  Section  306.  

Therefore, the trial court convicted and sentenced  

the accused persons for offence punishable under  

7

Page 8

8

Section 304B of the IPC and also cancelled their  

bail bonds, pursuant to this conviction.

6.The High Court, in the impugned judgment has stated  

that  in  dowry  death  cases,  direct  evidence  is  

hardly available and such cases are usually proved  

by circumstantial evidence. Further, the High Court  

has stated that the death of the deceased cannot be  

said  to  be  under  normal  circumstances  for  the  

reason  that  at  the  place  of  occurrence  the  

investigating officer found a matchbox, a plastic  

jeri-can of five litres, half filled with kerosene  

oil and there was cot and bed towards the feet of  

the deceased but these articles were intact. It was  

felt by the High Court that it is surprising that  

the deceased was burnt to 90% and she might have  

moved  around  writhing  in  pain  and  during  this  

process  the  articles  kept  inside  the  room  might  

have caught fire but these circumstances were not  

found.  Further,  it  has  come  in  the  prosecution  

evidence that the deceased was making complaints  

about the torture meted out to her by her in-laws  

at her matrimonial house in lieu of dowry demands  

8

Page 9

9

and it has further held that the appellants-accused  

persons also could not explain the reason for the  

deceased  having  committed  suicide  at  her  

matrimonial house. Thus, the High Court came to the  

conclusion that the death of the deceased cannot be  

said to be in normal circumstances. Therefore, the  

High Court held that it can be safely presumed that  

this is a case of dowry death against the accused  

persons in whose house the deceased had died due to  

burn injuries. The High Court further stated that  

another circumstance which goes against the accused  

persons  is  that  they  did  not  inform  the  

parents/brothers of the deceased on coming to know  

of  her  death.  The  High  Court  has  held  in  its  

judgment,  on  the  basis  of  the  evidence  of  the  

witnesses,  that  the  prosecution  case  of  ill-

treatment  of  the  deceased  at  the  hands  of  the  

accused  was  found  to  be  fully  established.  

Therefore, the High Court has upheld the conviction  

and  sentence  awarded  by  the  trial  court  in  its  

judgment  and  dismissed  the  appeal  of  the  

appellants.   

9

Page 10

10

7.The  learned  counsel  for  the  appellants  have  

contended that there was no evidence on record to  

show that the deceased had been subjected to any  

cruelty  or  harassment  by  the  appellants  in  

connection  with  demand  of  dowry  soon  before  her  

death and the conditions set forth for conviction  

under Section 304B of the IPC were not satisfied by  

the prosecution. It was further contended by the  

learned  counsel  that  there  were  no  demands  for  

dowry  either  at  the  time  of  marriage  or  

subsequently and the courts below have erred in law  

in  convicting  and  sentencing  the  appellants  by  

relying upon the letter of P.W.3 marked as Ex.Ka.3,  

even  though  the  trial  court  had  come  to  the  

conclusion that the letter has been interpolated.  

The trial court has observed that in the letter,  

the  word  ‘Sasur’  (father-in-law)  has  been  added  

after the word ‘Sas’ (mother-in-law)and many other  

words have been added or struck off here and there  

in the letter. Thus, the reliance placed by the  

trial  court  upon  such  evidence  to  convict  the  

appellants  of  the  charge  was  erroneous  in  law.  

10

Page 11

11

Further,  it  is  contended  by  the  learned  counsel  

that the courts below have picked one line from one  

place  and  another  from  another  place  from  the  

evidence of the prosecution witnesses to arrive at  

the conclusion and held that there was demand for  

dowry by the appellants.

8.The learned counsel for the respondent-the State of  

Uttarakhand  has  contended  that  the  evidence  on  

record adduced by the prosecution witnesses would  

clearly  show  that  the  deceased  was  regularly  

subjected  to  cruelty  and  harassment  by  the  

appellants as she was poor and brought less dowry  

to  the  family  of  the  appellants.  The  letter,  

Ex.Ka.3 written by P.W.3, one of the brothers of  

the deceased to his parents informing them about  

the  demand  of  the  accused  persons  for  30,000/-  

with the brother of the deceased would clearly show  

that the demand for dowry is proved and the same is  

accepted by the trial court and the trial court  

rightly convicted and sentenced the accused persons  

for the offence under Section 304B of the IPC. It  

is further contended by the learned counsel for the  

11

Page 12

12

respondent-State that the conviction of the accused  

persons under Section 304B of the IPC on the basis  

of the evidence on record was legally correct and  

the same need not be interfered with by this Court  

and must be upheld.

9. We  have  heard  the  rival  factual  and  legal  

contentions urged on behalf of both the parties and  

very carefully perused the evidence on record to  

examine  the  correctness  of  the  finding  recorded  

against  the  accused  persons  in  the  impugned  

judgment. The following points would arise for our  

consideration:

(i) Whether  the  trial  court  and  the  appellate  

court were correct in recording the finding  

that the accused are guilty of offence under  

S.304B  of  the  IPC  and  in  convicting  and  

sentencing them under this Section?

(ii) What order to be passed?  

10.  On considering the evidence of the prosecution  

witnesses as deposed by them which is on record, we  

are  of  the  view  that  the  charges  of  cruelty  or  

12

Page 13

13

harassment against the accused are not supported by  

legal  evidence  on  record.  The  courts  below  have  

erroneously  placed  reliance  on  the  letter  (Ex.  

Ka.3) written by P.W.3 to his parents which is on  

record to establish the charge u/s 304B of the IPC,  

wherein he has stated in his letter that P.W.7 had  

gone to the matrimonial house of the deceased and  

was  met  with  demand  for  30,000/-.  There  is  no  

evidence of demand for dowry by the accused persons  

prior  to  the  alleged  demand  of  30,000/-.  To  

satisfy the ingredients of the provision of Section  

304B  of  the  IPC,  the  death  of  a  woman  must  be  

caused due to burns or bodily injuries, and must be  

within 7 years of her marriage. Further, it must be  

proved  that  soon  before  her  death,  she  was  

subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband  

or her relatives “in connection with the demand for  

dowry”.  

11. The  said  charge  has  not  been  proved  by  the  

prosecution  by  adducing  evidence  to  attract  the  

ingredients of the offence under Section 304B of the  

IPC.  The trial court and the appellate court have  

13

Page 14

14

not taken great care in analysing and appreciating  

the evidence on record, keeping in view the gravity  

of  the  offence  of  dowry  death  and  the  punishment  

prescribed  for  it  u/s  304B  of  the  IPC.  They  were  

required to scrutinise the evidence very cautiously  

and carefully in order to arrive at the conclusion as  

to whether all the ingredients of the offence with  

reference to the conditions enumerated u/s 304B of  

the IPC to convict the accused have been satisfied by  

the  prosecution.  On  perusal  of  the  evidence  on  

record, we are of the view that the charge is not  

proved by the prosecution, particularly as the courts  

below have failed to notice that the prosecution has  

failed to prove that the dowry demand was made by the  

accused  either  at  the  time  of  marriage  or  

subsequently as it has not produced convincing and  

cogent evidence in this regard. In this case, the  

evidence on record is not clear as to whether the  

demand for 30,000/- as alleged to have been made by  

the accused is a demand for dowry with the deceased  

that  can  constitute  cruelty  or  harassment  by  the  

accused. The High Court, after careful examination of  

14

Page 15

15

the letter dated 28.06.1993, has found that it has  

been  interpolated  and  that  some  changes  have  been  

made in the letter and some words were added to it.  

The courts below have erred in law in convicting the  

appellants  herein  by  erroneously  placing  reliance  

upon  the  above  so  called  letter,  wherein  certain  

words were added with a view to make out a fabricated  

charge against them to secure the conviction of the  

accused persons. We are of the view that the document  

Ex.Ka.3  was  created  for  the  purpose  of  falsely  

implicating  the  accused  to  secure  their  conviction  

for the charge under Section 304B of the IPC. The  

said letter has been erroneously relied upon by the  

courts below to establish the allegation that there  

was cruelty or harassment by the accused persons on  

the deceased which has resulted in setting up of the  

circumstances for her death. The courts below have  

not noticed the important aspect of the case, namely,  

that the charge of dowry death, that there was demand  

on the deceased either before the marriage or soon  

before the death of the deceased made against the  

accused  persons,  should  have  been  proved  beyond  

15

Page 16

16

reasonable doubt. The courts below have also failed  

to consider the relevant fact namely, the appellants  

herein  were  not  in  the  house  at  the  time  of  the  

incident.  

12. In our considered view, after careful analysis of  

the  aforesaid  aspects  of  the  case  and  on  careful  

perusal of the evidence on record, the finding of  

fact recorded by the High Court in convicting the  

accused for the charge of Section 304B of the IPC is  

not  only  erroneous  in  fact  but  also  suffers  from  

error in law and therefore, the present appeals must  

succeed.

13. In view of the aforesaid reasons, i.e. the lack  

of  compelling  evidence,  we  have  to  reverse  the  

judgment and order of the High Court by setting aside  

the conviction of the accused persons under Section  

304B of the IPC. The impugned judgment of the High  

Court cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly  

set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all the  

charges. The appellants are on bail, their bail bonds  

stand discharged.

16

Page 17

17

14. The appeals are allowed accordingly.  

                                                                                     ………………………………………………………………………J.                         [SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA]

                      ………………………………………………………………………J.            [V. GOPALA GOWDA]

New Delhi, November 1, 2013  

17