Author: Sana Qureshi, student at Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia University, New Delhi.
- ABSTRACT
- INTRODUCTION ON DOWRY DEATH
- CASE ANALYSIS OF STATE OF KARNATAKA BY GANDHINAGAR P.S. Vs. M.N. BASAVARAJA & ORS
- CONCLUSION
- REFERENCES
- FAQS
ABSTRACT
Dowry deaths are a serious social issue in India. It has resulted in the death of women as a result of her husband’s or his relatives’ harassment of dowry demands, which frequently leads to murder or suicide. This essay will explain what dowry death is and give you insights into various provisions relating to it. You will also gain insight into the Supreme Court case Criminal Appeal No. 503 of 2013: State of Karnataka by Gandhinagar P.S. vs. M.N. Basavaraja & Ors. Regarding dowry death, this case emphasises the difficulties in proving dowry-related harassment and eventual death beyond a reasonable doubt.
DOWRY DEATH
The term ‘dowry’ is nowhere defined under IPC, 1860. IPC does not provide definition for what the dowry is. It is defined under Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. According to Section 2 of The Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, a “dowry” is defined as any property or valuable security given or promised to be given, either directly or indirectly, by one party in a marriage to the other party, or by the parents or any other person on behalf of either party to the marriage, to either party or to anyone.
This applies before, during, and after marriage, with the exception of dower or mahr in circumstances where Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies. The term “valuable security” carries the identical definition as outlined in Section 30 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860.
The provision of Dowry death is given under S. 304 B of IPC, 1860 that is “If a woman dies within seven years of marriage by any burns or bodily injury or it was revealed that before her marriage she was exposed to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any other relative of the husband in connection to demand dowry then the death of the woman will be considered as dowry death.”
Essential for dowry death are as follows:
1.The death of the women has been caused due to burns, bodily injury, or under circumstances that are not normal.
2.The death would be caused within seven years of her marriage.
3.The woman must have faced brutality or harassment from her husband or his relatives.
4.This violence or harassment must have been motivated by dowry demands and occurred shortly before her death.
5.Evidence must establish that the woman was subjected to such brutality or harassment shortly before she died.
Punishment for dowry death is mentioned under S. 304 B (2) of IPC, 1860 that is anyone who commits dowry death will be punished with imprisonment for a term of no less than 7 years, which can extend to life imprisonment.
Some Other Related Provisions:
S. 498A of IPC talks about ‘cruelty’. Anyone who subjects a woman to cruelty, whether the husband or a relative of the husband, will be punished with imprisonment for a term that may extend to three years and will also be liable to a fine.
S. 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872(IEA) talks about the ‘Presumption as to dowry death’. If a woman dies and there is evidence that shortly before her death she was subjected to harassment or cruelty due to a demand for dowry. Then the court shall presume that such person had caused such dowry death until disproved.
ANALYSIS OF CASE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY GANDHINAGAR P.S. Vs. M.N. BASAVARAJA & ORS.
In this case, a case was filed before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II at Davangere, Karnataka against the Husband of Susheelamma and relatives of husband for committing an offense punishable under Sections 302, 498A, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
In order of court dated 4th March, 2004, all the respondents were acquitted. State of Karnataka appealed the same before High Court. The High Court in its judgment and order dated on 27th August, 2010 confirmed the acquittal of the respondents for the offences under sections 302 and 201 of the IPC as well as sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act; however, convicted the husband under section 498A, IPC only.
It was further appealed in SC. The learned counsel contends that all the ingredients of section 304B, IPC were present,
(i) Susheelamma died within the period of 7 years of her marriage;
(ii) Death was not normal and comes under the category of beyond normal circumstances;
(iii) There was ample evidence on record indicating that Susheelamma was subjected to cruelty by her husband prior to her unnatural death, which is further substantiated by his unchallenged conviction under Section 498A of the IPC.; and
(iv) The High Court made a significant error by not presuming Susheelamma’s death as a dowry death, despite clear evidence that the cruelty inflicted upon her was due to her inability to provide the necessary dowry.
Counsel also referred the case of Shamnsaheb M. Multtani vs. State of Karnataka under which some important provisions was postulated;
The counsel for appellant prayed before SC that the session court may be directed to re-start the trial against the respondents from the stage of defence evidence in order to afford them fair opportunity of defence to disprove the presumption of dowry death under section 304B, IPC read with section 113B of the Evidence Act, 1872.
The counsel for responded given the argument that It is further submitted that the material witnesses for the prosecution were interested witnesses and, therefore, the Sessions Court was entirely correct in not relying on their evidence.
SC ordered the session court to re-start the trial against the respondents from the stage of defence evidence and regarding interested witness it mentioned:
a woman who faces harassment and cruelty due to her or her family’s inability to meet dowry demands typically confides in her immediate family members. Dismissing the evidence of these family members as biased because of their personal interest raises the question of who else could provide reliable testimony to bring the perpetrator to justice. We firmly reject this argument as entirely baseless.
CONCLUSION
Dowry death remains a serious social and legal issue in India, frequently resulting in catastrophic results for women subjected to harassment and brutality in response to dowry demands. The legal structure governing dowry deaths, as encapsulated in Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, aims to bring justice and accountability in such circumstances. However, the interpretation and application of these statutes, as indicated by the study of Criminal Appeal No. 503 of 2013 (State of Karnataka by Gandhinagar P.S. vs. M.N. Basavaraja & Ors.), reveal considerable difficulties in proving these offences beyond reasonable doubt.
The Supreme Court’s participation in this case emphasises the necessity of fair trials and evidence review, particularly when dealing with sensitive matters such as dowry deaths. The Court’s decision to order a retrial based on defence evidence emphasises the need of thoroughly investigating all aspects of the case in order to uphold justice and hold culprits accountable.
Furthermore, the Court’s rejection of the premise that family members’ testimony is biassed because of their personal interests underscores the importance of familial testimony in uncovering the truth and seeking justice for victims of dowry-related violence.
In conclusion, while legal provisions exist to address dowry killings, their effective execution necessitates a sophisticated strategy that strikes a balance between legal scrutiny and sympathy to the victims and families. Continued efforts in legal education, awareness, and procedural fairness are critical to combating the plague of dowry deaths and providing justice to those affected.
REFERENCES
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
K.D. Gaur, Indian Penal Code (Lexis Nexis, 8th edn. , 2023)
FAQs
Q.1 What are the essentials for proving dowry death under S.304 B of IPC?
Ans. 1.The death of the women has been caused due to burns, bodily injury, or under circumstances that are not normal.
2.The death would be caused within seven years of her marriage.
3.The woman must have faced brutality or harassment from her husband or his relatives.
4.This violence or harassment must have been motivated by dowry demands and occurred shortly before her death.
5.Evidence must establish that the woman was subjected to such brutality or harassment shortly before she died.
Q.2 What is the punishment for dowry death?
Ans. Punishment for dowry death is mentioned under S. 304 B (2) of IPC, 1860 that is anyone who commits dowry death will be punished with imprisonment for a term of no less than 7 years, which can extend to life imprisonment.
Q.3 Can family members would be considered as reliable witnesss in dowry death?
Ans. Yes, family members provides crucial testimony in dowry death cases as they are likely to have knowledge of the harassment and cruelty faced by the victim. Dismissing their evidence solely on the basis of their personal interest is not justified, as highlighted by the Supreme Court in various judgments.
Q.4 How can dowry deaths be prevented?
Ans. Preventive measures include strict enforcement of anti-dowry laws, awareness campaigns, empowering women economically and socially, and promoting gender equality.
