2015 (2) TMI 1338 - SC - Indian Laws

Dowry - a young woman consumes pesticide having been driven to do so by repeated demands being made on her for money by the family into which she is supposed to merge her identity - Can it be argued that it is a penal statute and, should, therefore, in case of ambiguity in its language, be construed strictly? HELD THAT - Any money or property or valuable security demanded by any of the persons mentioned in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, at or before or at any time after the marriage which is reasonably connected to the death of a married woman, would necessarily be in connection with or in relation to the marriage unless, the facts of a given case clearly and unequivocally point otherwise - Days or months are not what is to be seen. What must be borne in mind is that the word soon does not mean immediate . A fair and pragmatic construction keeping in mind the great social evil that has led to the enactment of Section 304B would make it clear that the expression is a relative expression. Time lags may differ from case to case. All that is necessary is that the demand for dowry should not be stale but should be the continuing cause for the death of the married woman under Section 304B. The facts of this appeal are glaring. Demands for money were made shortly after one year of the marriage. A she-buffalo was given by the father to the daughter as a peace offering. The peace offering had no effect. The daughter was ill-treated. She went back to her father and demanded money again. The father, then, went along with his brother and the Sarpanch of the village to the matrimonial home with a request that the daughter be not ill-treated on account of the demand for money. The father also assured the said persons that their money demand would be fulfilled and that they would have to wait till the crops of his field are harvested. Fifteen days before her death, Salwinder Kaur again visited her parents' house on being maltreated by her new family. Then came death by poisoning. The cross-examination of the father of Salwinder Kaur has, in no manner, shaken his evidence. On the facts, therefore, the concurrent findings recorded by both the courts below are upheld. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Definition and interpretation of "dowry" under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Ingredients required to establish the offence of dowry death under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
3. Interpretation of the term "soon before" her death in the context of dowry death.
4. Evaluation of evidence and concurrent findings by lower courts.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Definition and Interpretation of "Dowry":
The judgment discusses the definition of "dowry" as per Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The section is broken down into six parts:
- Dowry includes any property or valuable security.
- The property or security can be given or agreed to be given.
- It can be given directly or indirectly.
- It can be given by one party to the marriage, parents, or any other person.
- It can be given at any time, before, during, or after the marriage.
- It must be in connection with the marriage.

The court emphasizes that the term "dowry" should be interpreted broadly to include any demand for property or valuable security related to the marriage.

2. Ingredients Required to Establish Dowry Death:
The judgment outlines four essential ingredients for the offence under Section 304B IPC:
- The death must be caused by burns, bodily injury, or occur under abnormal circumstances.
- The death must occur within seven years of marriage.
- The woman must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives.
- The cruelty or harassment must be in connection with the demand for dowry.

These ingredients are reiterated from previous judgments such as Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana and others, emphasizing the need for a nexus between the dowry demand and the death.

3. Interpretation of "Soon Before" Her Death:
The term "soon before" is crucial for establishing dowry death. The court clarifies that "soon before" does not mean "immediately before" but implies a proximate and live link between the cruelty or harassment and the death. The time frame is relative and depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. The court cites Surinder Singh v. State of Haryana and Sher Singh v. State of Haryana to support this interpretation, emphasizing a pragmatic and sensitive approach.

4. Evaluation of Evidence and Concurrent Findings by Lower Courts:
The court examines the evidence presented, particularly the testimony of the deceased's father, which was accepted by both the trial court and the High Court. The father testified about the repeated demands for money and the ill-treatment of his daughter, which were corroborated by other witnesses. The cross-examination did not weaken this testimony. The court upheld the concurrent findings of the lower courts, confirming the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 304B IPC.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence of the appellant for dowry death. The judgment clarifies the broad interpretation of "dowry," the essential ingredients for establishing dowry death, and the relative meaning of "soon before" in the context of such cases. The court's analysis underscores the importance of a fair and pragmatic approach to combat the social evil of dowry deaths.