Dowry death shall be presumed if it is shown that woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand for dowry soon before her death: SC

Read Judgment: Parvati Devi & Others vs. State of Bihar Now State of Jharkhand & Others

Pankaj Bajpai

New Delhi, December 24, 2021: The Supreme Court has held that once the prosecution has been able to demonstrate that a woman has been subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with any demand for dowry, soon before her death, there is a presumption that the persons who have subjected her to cruelty or harassment in connection with the demand for dowry, have caused a dowry death within the meaning of Section 304B of IPC. 

A Larger Bench of Chief Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Surya Kant therefore observed that once deceased had gone missing from her matrimonial home within few months of her marriage and after demands of dowry, then such a death would have to be characterized as a “dowry death”. 

The background of the case is that, the informant – Bodhi Mahto had got his daughter, Fulwa Devi, married to Ram Sahay Mahto (Accused & first Appellant). However, within a few months of the marriage, Appellant’s father Nema Mahto (since deceased) and mother, Parvati Devi (third Appellant) started to harass Fulwa Devi raising a demand for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- in cash and a Rajdoot Motor cycle. On expressing the inability of her parents to satisfy their demands, she was brutally assaulted and given threat of marrying another girl. Thereafter, on information being received that his daughter had gone missing from her matrimonial home, informant rushed to her home but finding her traceless, he approached Birni Police Station and lodged a missing complaint. Accordingly, a case was registered against the accused for the offences u/s 304/201/34 IPC and charge-sheet was filed for the said offences along with Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Five days after the FIR was lodged, a skeleton was recovered from the banks of river Barakar, which was assumed to be that of Fulwa Devi. To bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined seven witnesses, whereas the accused examined six witnesses. 

Linking the chain of circumstantial evidence from the point when Fulwa Devi had informed her parents and relations about the dowry demands made upon her by the accused within a few months of her marriage to the stage when she had suddenly gone missing from her matrimonial home and finally, when her body was recovered on the banks of river Barakar, the High Court concurred with the findings returned by the trial Court that the accused have miserably failed to explain the circumstances under which the deceased had vanished from her matrimonial home and has outrightly rejected the defence set up by the accused that she was not residing with her husband and in-laws. 

After considering the submissions, the Apex Court observed that recovery of the body from the banks of the river clearly indicates that Fulwa Devi had died under abnormal circumstances that could only be explained by her husband and in-laws, as she was residing at her matrimonial home when she suddenly disappeared and no plausible explanation was offered for her disappearance. 

Further, the plea raised on behalf of the accused that the body recovered from the banks of Barakar river was unidentifiable, is devoid of merits when the father of the deceased testified that he could recognize the dead body as that of Fulwa Devi, noted the Top Court. 

The Larger Bench opined that there is sufficient evidence brought on record to inculpate Ram Sahay Mahto (husband of the deceased, and the circumstances put together, unerringly point to his guilt in extinguishing the life of his wife within a few months of the marriage on her failing to satisfy the demands of dowry. 

Accordingly, the Larger Bench maintained the conviction and sentence imposed on the husband of the deceased, however, directed the release of the mother-in-law of the deceased, observing that only certain omnibus allegations have been made against her with respect to dowry demands without pointing to any specific evidence or testimony against her.