news details |
|
|
| HC set-aside conviction of husband in dowry death case | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Sept 3: Jammu Justice Sanjeev Kumar of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set-aside the order/judgment dated 26th November, 2013 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Bandipora as also an order dated 29.11.2013 passed therein, whereby and whereunder the appellant Showket Ahmad Ratherhas been convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 498-A RPC and Section 306 RPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs.5000/- in respect of Section 498-A RPC and rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in respect of offence under Section 306 RPC. The sentences imposed are directed to run concurrently.
According to the case that it came to light during the course of investigation that the deceased had died on 17th April,2006 due to consuming of some poisonous substance. The complainant Maqsood Ahmad Sofi filed yet another complaint raising allegation of harassment meted out to the deceased by her in-laws, which, as per the complainant, forced the deceased to end her life by committing suicide. On this FIR No.73/2006 under Section 498-A & 306 RPC was lodged. The investigating agency completed the investigation and concluded that the deceased had died due to consuming of poison and, therefore, the appellant was prima facie guilty of offence under Sections 306 and 498-A RPC.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar While setting aside the conviction observed that 28. It is, thus, evident that the term "the Court may presume, having regard to all other circumstances of the case, that such suicide has been abetted by her husband", would clearly indicate that the presumption is discretionary. Mere fact that the deceased committed suicide within a period of seven years of her marriage, presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act would not automatically apply. The legislative mandate is that where a woman commits suicide within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that her husband or any relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty as defined under Section 498-A, presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act may be raised having regard to all the circumstances of the case that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband. As against the presumption that is raised under Section 113-A, presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act is mandatory. Therefore, when presumption under Section 113-A is raised, the prosecution must show evidence of cruelty and continuous harassment in that regard. From the evidence on record, it is difficult for this Court to say that there is enough material on record to conclude that the deceased was subjected to harassment with a view to coercing her to meet the demand of dowry. Though, the witnesses have in a parrot like version stated that the deceased had always been complaining against the demand of dowry by the appellant and his parents. —JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
