Death of Women by Burn Injuries within Seven Years of Marriage – Is it Necessary to Prove Approximate and Live Link
![Death of Women by Burn Injuries within Seven Years of Marriage](https://lawwallet.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/701617-dowry-death-final-170308-1024x576-1.jpg)
Case Study – SATBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER V STATE OF HARYANA
DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 28.05.2021
BENCH: LL 2021 SC 260
EQUIVALENT CITATION: N.V RAMANA, CJI, JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
ANALYSIS OF CASE:
A present case is an appeal preferred by the appellants against the judgment passed by the Punjab and Haryana Court whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellants and upheld the conviction passed by the Trial Court.
Table of Contents:
- Facts of Case
- Issues
- Arguments of the Appellants
- Arguments of the Respondents
- Judgment
- Case Law – Bansi Lal v State of Haryana
- Conclusion
FACTS OF CASE:
Satbir Singh (appellant no. 1) and the deceased got married on 1.07.1994. On 31.7.1995, at about 4 or 4.30, the father of the deceased was informed by the villagers that his daughter has been admitted to the hospital. On receiving the information, the father of the deceased along with his wife and son reached the hospital where they found that the deceased passed away due to burning injuries and there was a smell of Kerosene from the body of the bdeceased.
ISSUES:
Whether the Trial Court and High Court was correct in convicting the accused under section 304b of Indian Penal Code, 1860?
Whether the Trial Court was correct in convicting the accused under section 306 of Indian Penal Code, 1860?
ARGUMENT OF THE APPELLANTS
- Possibility of fire has not been ruled in the present case.
- The Prosecution failed to prove that there was a demand for dowry.
- Lastly the Prosecution has failed to prove that the demand for dowry was the cause of the death of the deceased.
ARGUMENTS OF THE RESPONDENT
- Appellants had not been able to show any material which would merit the interference of this court in the concurrent findings of the courts below.
- The death of the deceased was occurred within one year of marriage which is a highlighting fact of case.
- The witnesses have stated the specific instances of demand for dowry with consistency.
JUDGEMENT
The Court by placing the reliance on the case kans Raj V State of Punjab, (2000) 5 SCC 207 held that an expression “soon before” under section 304b of IPC did not mean “immediately before”. It is upon the discretion of a court. The factum of cruelty differs from case to case as it can range from physical, verbal or even emotional. There is no straitjacket formula that can be laid down for the purpose of determining what exacts the phrase “soon before” entails. In relation to dowry deaths, it is not necessary to show that there is an existence of cruelty or harassment to the deceased at a particular instance but normally refer to a course of conduct. Such conduct may be spread over a period of time. There must be a proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and death. Therefore, Courts should use their discretion to determine whether the period between the cruelty and the death of the victim would come within the term “soon before”. What is pivotal is to determine whether there is an establishment of “proximate and live link” between the cruelty and consequential death of the victim. The Supreme Court by referring the case “Bansi Lal v State of Haryana, (2011) 11 SCC 359, further held that that when the Prosecution shows that ‘soon before her death such woman has been subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with demand for dowry’, a presumption under section 113b of the Evidence Act, 1872 against the accused arises. Thereafter, the onus is on the accused to rebut this statutory presumption. Therefore, once all the ingredients under section 304b of IPC, 1860 are proved by the prosecution, then presumption under section 113b of Evidence Act, 1872 is mandatory to operate against the accused. In the present case the court stated that the smell of the kerosene oil on the body of the deceased is the cause of death due to which burn injuries were inflicted to her. A relation between the burn injuries and the causing of the death within seven years of marriage clearly satisfies the first two ingredients of the offence under section 304b of IPC, 1860. The Court also expressed concerns about the manner in which Trial Courts adopt a casual and cursory attitude while recording the statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court by rejecting the contentions of the appellants admitted that the marriage was solemnized on 1.7.1994 and the death of the deceased was occurred on 31.7.1995. Considering the issue of dowry demand, there were various evidences which shows that deceased had disclosed to her brother that she was subjected to physical harassment by her husband and mother-in law on account of bringing insufficient dowry. After considering all the facts, it is shown that that the prosecution was successful in proving that the death was caused due to burn injuries within approximately one year of marriage. However, the accused person failed to prove that the death was caused accidently. Thereafter, by rejecting the contention raised by the appellants, Supreme Court upheld the conviction under section 306b of IPC, 1860 and set aside the conviction under section 306 IPC, 1860 due to inability to adduce sufficient evidence relating to sucide.
CONCLUSION
It is, hereby, concluded that in order to penalize the accused under section 304b of Indian Penal Code, 1860, it is necessary to establish a “proximate and live link” between the dowry death of a woman and a cruelty or harassment for dowry demand by the husband or his relatives.