Home
Issues:
Conviction under Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.), demand for dowry, cruelty, unnatural death due to strangulation, presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, appropriate sentence under Section 304B I.P.C. Analysis: The judgment involves an appeal against the conviction of the appellant under Sections 304B and 498A I.P.C. The appellant was initially convicted by the trial court and the High Court upheld the conviction, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court. The case revolved around the death of the deceased due to strangulation within seven years of her marriage, with allegations of demand for dowry and cruelty by the accused. The trial court and the High Court both found that the death was unnatural, resulting from strangulation, and upheld the conviction under Sections 304B and 498A I.P.C. The appellant's plea of denial and the claim of finding the deceased hanging were deemed unacceptable. Despite the case relying on circumstantial evidence, the court invoked the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act, leading to the conviction under Section 304B I.P.C. Regarding the question of sentence, the court considered the provisions of Section 304B I.P.C., which mandates imprisonment for a term not less than seven years for dowry death. The court discussed the presumption clauses under Section 113B of the Evidence Act and Section 304B I.P.C., emphasizing that the accused can be deemed responsible for dowry death even without direct involvement if cruelty and harassment are proven. The court noted the absence of direct evidence linking the accused to the death but emphasized that the unnatural death due to strangulation still attracted Section 304B I.P.C. The court balanced the evidence, acknowledging conflicting medical opinions but ultimately upheld the conviction under Section 304B I.P.C. The court, however, modified the sentence, reducing the imprisonment for life to 10 years to ensure justice was served appropriately. In conclusion, the Supreme Court confirmed the appellant's conviction under Section 304B I.P.C. while reducing the sentence to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment. The other convictions and sentences against the appellant were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed with the modified sentence.
|