Dowry Death Presumption Under S.113B Of Evidence Act: Proximity Test Does Not Define Any Particular Time Period: Supreme Court

  • Post category:Daily Judgments
  • Reading time:5 mins read

Dowry Death Presumption Under S.113B Of Evidence Act: Proximity Test Does Not Define Any Particular Time Period

Case: Parvati Devi v State of Bihar now State of Jharkhand

Coram: Justices N.V.Ramana, Surya Kant and Hima Kohli

Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 574 Of 2012

Court Observation: “(i) that the death of a woman must have been caused by burns or bodily injury or occurred otherwise than under normal circumstance;

(ii) that such a death must have occurred within a period of seven years of her marriage;

(iii) that the woman must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment at the hands of her husband, soon before her death; and

(iv) that such a cruelty or harassment must have been for or related to any demand for dowry.”

“While considering the case under Section 498-A (Sic. Section 304-B), cruelty has to be proved during the close proximity of time of death and it should be continuous and such continuous harassment, physical or mental, by the accused should make life of the deceased miserable which may force her to commit suicide.”

“To attract the provisions of Section 304-B, one of the main ingredients of the offence which is required to be established is that “soon before her death” she was subjected to cruelty or harassment “for, or in connection with the demand for dowry”. The expression “soon before her death” used in Section 304-IPC and Section 113-B of the Evidence Act is present with the idea of proximity test. However, the said expression would normally imply that the interval should not be much between the cruelty or harassment concerned and the death in question. In other words, there must be existence of a proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the death concerned. If the alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has become stale enough not to disturb the mental equilibrium of the women concerned, it would be of no consequence.”

“Section 304B IPC read in conjunction with Section 113B of the Evidence Act leaves no manner of doubt 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, the Court shall proceed on 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 IPC. The said presumption is, however, rebuttable and can be dispelled on the accused being able to demonstrate through cogent evidence that all the ingredients of Section 304B IPC have not been satisfied.”

Previous Posts

Decisions Of Expert Bodies Like PSC Should Not Be Lightly Interfered With: Supreme Court Upholds UP Police Recruitment Process

Mere Common Intention Per Se May Not Attract Section 34 IPC Without An Action In Furtherance: Supreme Court

Arbitrator Can Grant Post-Award Interest On The Interest Amount Awarded: Supreme Court

S.397 IPC: Use Of The Weapon Does Not Require That The Offender Should Actually Fire Or Stab, Mere Exhibition Or Brandishing of the Same Is Sufficient: Supreme Court

Tribunal Decisions Can Be Scrutinized Only By A Jurisdictional High Court: Supreme Court

Trees To Be Valued Separately When Acquired Land Value Is Determined With Reference To Sales Statistics: Supreme Court Download Judgement