MATHUR, J.
By the judgment impugned dated 7.7.2005, Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Balotara convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:-
| Nakhtaram : | |
| u/S.304-B IPC : | Life imprisonment. |
| u/S.498-A IPC : | One years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. |
| Kesararam : | |
| u/S.304-B IPC : | Seven years rigorous imprisonment. |
| u/S.498-A IPC : | One years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. |
| Smt. Puri : | |
| u/S.304-B IPC : | Seven years rigorous imprisonment. |
| u/S.498-A IPC : | One years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. |
On basis of the information aforesaid a report was drawn and intimation was sent to the Tehsildar Barmer for further inquest.
An another report (Ex.P/6) was submitted by Shri Baburam (PW-4), uncle of deceased, on 6.9.2002 at police station Ramsar with assertion that his niece Smt. Tibi was married to Nakhtaram about four years back. She was always subjected to harassment for dowry. About 15 days earlier, she came to her maternal home with complaint about her harassment by in-laws for dowry. After three days, Nakhtaram and Kesararam came to bring her with them and she was sent with them in presence of Sawai Singh and Jograj Singh, two responsible persons of the village. Nakhtaram and Kesararam while carrying Tibi with them assured for no further harassment to her. However, on 5.9.2002 at about 4-5 AM Sheraram and Rajuram, both residents of Sura informed about commission of suicide by Smt. Tibi by hanging herself. On receiving the information Prabharam, Dwarkaram, Chhaganaram and Jograj Singh came to Sura, where at the residence of Nakhtaram they found Smt. Tibi lying dead. The body of Smt. Tibi was having injuries on neck, hands and on a leg. As per the report Nakhtaram, Kesararam (father of Nakhtaram), Puri Devi (wife of Kesararam) two elder brothers of Nakhtaram viz. Ramaram and Dedaram, their wives and uncles Chetan, Shera and Mularam all use to harass Smt. Tibi.
On basis of the report aforesaid (Ex.P/6), a case was lodged and investigation was initiated for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A Indian Penal Code. On completion of investigation, a report as per provisions of Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed before a competent court and then the case was committed to the court of Sessions.
After hearing, charges were framed against the accused persons pertaining to the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A Indian Penal Code. The charges so framed were denied and trial was desired, thus, the same was conducted.
During the course of trial the prosecution supported its case with the aid of 22 witnesses including Jodharam (PW-1), Baburam (PW-4), Prabharam (PW-3), Smt. Aklo (PW-8), Motaram (PW-21), Dwarkaram (PW-17), Sawai Singh (PW-10) and Jograj Singh (PW-9). In evidence, the prosecution also produced Anil Kumar Jain (PW-6), the Executive Magistrate, who inquired the matter as per requirement of Section 174 Cr.P.C., Shri Jai Narain Meena (PW-16), the Investigating Officer, Dr. Ganpat Swaroop Choudhary (PW-20) and Dr. H.K.Sinhal (PW-22), both members of the medical board that conducted autopsy on the person of deceased Smt. Tibi. The prosecution also adduced evidence by getting several documents exhibited.
An opportunity was given to the accused persons to explain the adverse circumstances available against them in prosecution evidence. Entire evidence adduced by the prosecution was termed by the accused persons as false and concocted, with explanation that Smt. Tibi being depressed with domestic work committed suicide, and she was never subjected to any harassment for dowry.
In defence, statements of Smt. Champa (DW-1), Gemeraram (DW-2), Arjun Das (DW-3) and Jalaram (DW-4) were recorded and the documents Ex.D/1 to Ex.D/5 were exhibited.
The trial court after considering the entire material available on record framed five points for adjudication and those are :-
(1) whether Shri Nakhtaram, his mother Smt. Puri and his father Kesararam caused any physical/mental torture to deceased Smt. Tibi on the count of dowry?
(2) whether the marriage of deceased Tibi took place within a period of seven years from the date of her death?
(3) whether Smt. Tibi died in suspicious and abnormal circumstances?
(4) whether deceased Tibi was subjected to cruelty for dowry or any matter relating to dowry in near past to her death?
(5) if answer of the points above is affirmative, then what should be the sentence awarded to accused persons?
After examining the evidence, all the first four points were determined affirmative, thus, conviction of the accused persons was recorded and they were sentenced.
In appeal, while questioning correctness of the findings given by the trial court, the submission of counsel for the appellants is that from examination of entire evidence available on record, no material can be gathered regarding demand of dowry or any harassment/torture/cruelty pertaining to the dowry, and as such no finding against the accused appellants could have been recorded to convict and sentence them for commission of the offences prescribed under Sections 304-B and 498-A Indian Penal Code.
Learned Public Prosecutor in quite general terms defended the conviction recorded and sentence awarded.
Heard counsel for the parties.
We have examined the entire evidence available on record in lucid.
On basis of the medical evidence available, no doubt exists about homicidal death of Smt. Tibi. The only issue requires pondering is about availability of evidence sufficient to record conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A Indian Penal Code.
The trial court recorded the conviction while relying upon the statements of Baburam (PW-4), Prabharam (PW-3), Smt. Aklo (PW-8), Motaram (PW-21), Dwarkaram (PW-17), Sawai Singh (PW-10) and Jograj Singh (PW-9).
PW-1 Jodharam, who at first instance informed the police about death of Smt. Tibi, stated that he submitted a written report (Ex.P/1), acting thereupon the Sub Divisional Magistrate made necessary inquiry. This witness also verified the fact about death of Tibi by hanging, however, denied about coming of Prabharam, Dwarka, Lunaram, Chhaganaram and one Thakur at village, for want of knowledge. As such, he was declared hostile.
PW-3 Prabharam Meghwal is father of deceased Smt. Tibi and as per him his daughter Smt. Tibi was subjected to harassment by her husband Nakhtaram and the in-laws. He further stated that he was not knowing the reason for such harassment, but perhaps that would have been due to non-working by his daughter. He also stated that his son-in-law was involved in business of carpet making and Tibi was upset due to the fact that she was not able to knit carpets.
PW-4 Babu stated that whenever Tibi was coming to her parents, she was making complaint about the harassment subjected by her husband and in-laws. This witness also stated that about 15 days earlier to her death, Tibi came to her maternal home and complained about harassment extended to her for demand of dowry. As per this witness Kesara and Nakhta after three days, came to take Tibi with them with assurance that she shall not be subjected to any further harassment, thus, she was sent with them in presence of Jog Singh and Sawai Singh. This witness also stated that a sum of Rs.1800/- was given to Tibi, while proceeding to her in-laws house with her husband and father-in-law.
PW-8 Smt. Aklo, mother of deceased Tibi stated that her daughter complained her about the harassment faced by her on being tired while making carpets. This witness also stated that her daughter was apprehending her killing by her in-laws. During cross examination she also stated that in first two years of marriage Smt. Tibi was not subjected to harassment, however, subsequent thereto she was not having cordial relations with her husband Nakhtaram. This witness also stated that the dispute between the couple was due to making of carpets, for which Tibi was not having expertees.
PW-9 Shri Jograj Singh, who is a neighbour of Prabharam (PW-3), stated that he was having knowledge about harassment extended to Tibi by her husband and in-laws. This witness also stated that a sum of Rs.1800/- was given to Tibi while sending her to her in-laws house with Nakhta and Kesara. An another witness PW-10 Sawai Singh also deposed in the same manner as of PW-9 Jograj Singh.
PW-17 Dwarkaram, uncle of deceased, also stated about harassment extended to deceased Tibi by her in-laws. This witness also stated about the complaint made by deceased Tibi about taunting regarding quantum of dowry given. According to this witness husband of deceased Tibi was harassing her as she was not involving herself much with the work of carpet making.
PW-16 Jai Narain Meena narrated the details pertaining to the steps taken during the course of investigation being the Investigating Officer.
An important witness is Anil Kumar Jain (PW-6), the Sub Divisional Magistrate, who made necessary inquest as per Section 174 Cr.P.C. According to PW-6 during the course of inquiry Prabha (father of deceased), Dwarka and Chhagana conveyed him that the in-laws of deceased Tibi never made any demand for dowry.
Learned trial court convicted the accused appellants for commission of an offence punishable under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code. The provision aforesaid pertains to dowry death and to constitute an offence under this provision, (1)there must be death of a woman due to burns, bodily injury or under some other abnormal circumstance, (2)the death should be within a period of seven years of her marriage, (3)the deceased woman should have been subjected to cruelty or harassment just before her death, (4)such cruelty or harassment must be by husband of deceased woman or by any relative of her husband, and (5)cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with any demand for dowry.
The prosecution in every case of dowry death is required to establish all above noticed ingredients and non-availability of anyone is sufficient to bring out the death from the term “dowry death”. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Durga Prasad and Anr. v. State of M.P., reported in (2010)9 SCC 73, while examining the scope and ambit of the offence punishable under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code, held as under:-
“17. As has been mentioned hereinabove, in order to hold an accused guilty of an offence under Section 304-B IPC, it has to be shown that apart from the fact that the woman died on account of burn or bodily injury, otherwise than under normal circumstances, within 7 years of her marriage, it has also to be shown that soon before her death, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry. Only then would such death be called “dowry death” and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused the death of the woman concerned.
19. The decision cited by Mr. R.P.Gupta, learned Senior Advocate, in Biswajit Halder case was rendered in almost similar circumstances. In order to bring home a conviction under Section 304-B IPC, it will not be sufficient to only lead evidence showing that cruelty or harassment had been meted out to the victim, but that such treatment was in connection with the demand for dowry.”
On examination of the entire evidence available on record, the factual position emerges out is that deceased Tibi was subjected to harassment mainly due to her less involvement in carpet making. However, no sufficient material is available to give a conclusive finding that such harassment was extended for or in connection with any demand for dowry. Father of deceased Prabharam in his entire statement nowhere stated that any demand with regard to dowry was ever made by accused Nakhtaram or his parents. Smt. Aklo too has not much emphasised about any kind of demand made by Nakhtaram or his parents for or in connection with dowry. Shri Anil Kumar Jain (PW-6), who is absolutely an independent person, affirmatively stated that Prabharam, Chhagana and Dwarka stated before him that no demand for dowry was ever made by in-laws of deceased Smt. Tibi.
However, the fact about harassment by husband of deceased due to lack of interest in carpet making can certainly be inferred. PW-3 Prabharam, PW-4 Baburam, PW-8 Smt. Aklo, PW-17 Dwarkaram and PW-21 Motaram quite definitely stated about harassment extended to deceased Smt. Tibi and all these persons referred non-involvement of deceased Tibi in making of carpets as a reason for such harassment. PW-8 Smt. Aklo stated about her knowledge on basis of the information given by deceased Tibi about ill-effects faced due to dust coming out, while making carpets. This was also a reason to keep Smt. Tibi aloof from the work of carpet making.
What reveals from minute examination of the entire evidence is that the family of the accused persons was involved in the business of carpet making as i.e. quite frequent in rural areas of the region and in this work every member of families involves himself/herself. The labour require to put in for making carpets is quite tiring and it also causes adverse effects to the health, specially for the persons suffering from breathing problems. It appears that less involvement of Smt. Tibi with carpet making was the prime reason for extending harassment to her by Nakhtaram and his parents.
In view of the discussions made above, it can very well be said that the death of Tibi took place under abnormal circumstances. The death was within a period of seven years of her marriage.
However, no material is available to substantiate that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment just before her death and whatever harassment extended, that was in connection with any demand of dowry. The absence of the evidence in this regard brings out the act of the accused appellants from the ambit of the offence described under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code.
During the course of arguments learned Public Prosecutor suggested that the act of the accused appellants deserves to be brought into ambit of the offence punishable under Section 306 Indian Penal Code. However, on assessment of the evidence available we are not impressed with that. There is no evidence to establish intention of the accused appellants to provoke or encourage the deceased to bring her life at an end. For abatement there should be a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or abate in committing suicide, but the evidence to that extent is missing in present case.
The accused appellants have also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Girdhar Shankar Tawade v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2002)5 SCC 177, while explaining the Section 498-A Indian Penal Code observed as under:-
“2. Before, however, adverting to the factual score, it is to be noticed at this juncture that Section 498-A has been engrafted on to the statute-book by way of separate Chapter in terms of the provisions of the Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983). The above amendment stands incorporated by reason of the present trend in the society and to meet the requirement of the society, the legislature thought it fit to incorporate a new Chapter being Chapter XX-A in the statute-book consisting of Section 498-A in the Indian Penal Code. For convenience sake, Section 498-A is set out hereinbelow:
“498-A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.-- Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.--For the purpose of this section, 'cruelty' means—
(a)any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b)harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.”
3. The basic purport of the statutory provision is to avoid “cruelty” which stands defined by attributing a specific statutory meaning attached thereto as noticed hereinbefore. Two specific instances have been taken note of in order to ascribe a meaning to the word “cruelty” as is expressed by the legislatures; whereas Explanation (a) involves three specific situations viz. (i) to drive the woman to commit suicide or (ii) to cause grave injury or (iii) danger to life, limb or health, both mental and physical, and thus involving a physical torture or atrocity, in Explanation (b) there is absence of physical injury but the legislature thought it fit to include only coercive harassment which obviously as the legislative intent expressed is equally heinous to match the physical injury; whereas one is patent, the other one is latent but equally serious in terms of the provisions of the statute since the same would also embrace the attributes of “cruelty” in terms of Section 498-A.”
In the instant matter though we have not accepted any positive instigation on the part of the accused appellants for committing suicide by Smt. Tibi, however, death due to suicide cannot be ruled out. From the evidence available and already discussed above we find that the prosecution witnesses have in their testimonies stated about harassment subjected to the deceased for several reasons mainly for her lack of interest in carpet making.
The prosecution witnesses viz. Prabharam (PW-3), Smt. Aklo (PW-8), Baburam (PW-4) and Dwarkaram (PW-17) quite categorically stated that deceased Smt. Tibi was usually complaining them about harassment extended to her due to her lack of interest in carpet making work. The harassment so extended is nothing but “cruelty” as explained under explanations given with Section 498-A Indian Penal Code. As such, conviction of the accused appellants under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code deserves to be maintained.
In view of the discussions made above, we deem it appropriate to accept this appeal in part. Accordingly the same is allowed in part. The conviction of the accused appellants recorded by the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 304-B Indian Penal Code is quashed, thus, the sentence given for that offence is also set aside. However, the conviction recorded for the offence punishable under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code is maintained. The sentence awarded to accused appellant Nakhtaram for the offence punishable under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code is maintained, however, the fine of Rs.500/- is enhanced and that shall be Rs.2500/- and in default of payment of fine, he shall require to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment. The sentence of accused Kesararam and Smt. Puri for the offence punishable under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code, looking to their advance age, is reduced from one year's rigorous imprisonment to the imprisonment for the period they have already undergone. However, the fine of Rs.500/- imposed upon them by the trial court is enhanced for a sum of Rs.5000/- each. The fine imposed be paid to the daughter of deceased Smt. Tibi, within a period of three months of its deposition, in the form of fixed deposit with a nationalized bank for a term of five years. In default of payment of fine these accused appellants shall be further required to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. The bail bonds and sureties furnished by accused appellants Kesararam and Smt. Puri to avail suspension of sentence be discharged. Accused appellant Nakhtaram has also completed his term of sentence awarded by this Court, hence he too be released from State custody forthwith, if not otherwise required.