Ramakant Mishra @ Lalu Etc. Vs. State of U.P.
|
Head Note
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 304-B , The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32 (1)
Dowry Death - Dying Declaration - Evidentiary Value - Dying Declaration appears to have mysteriously popped up and referred to at the time of praying for bail - The chain or sequence of events which lead to its recording remains undisclosed - In his statement, the Tehsildar has not clarified the manner in which he happened to record the Dying Declaration and the timing of its transmission to the Court - Since the onus of proof had shifted to the Accused, this alleged sequence of events should have been proved beyond reasonable doubt by them - Tehsildar as well as the Doctor who allegedly certified that the deceased was in a fit state to make the Dying Declaration has been produced by the defence - The Doctor should have spoken of the sequence of events in which the Tehsildar came to record the Dying Declaration - The alleged exculpating Dying Declaration held to be shrouded in suspicion and the Court have not been persuaded to accept that it is a genuine document - The defence has failed to comply with Section 113B of the Evidence Act - The Accused being charged of the commission of a dowry death ought to have entered the witness box themselves - The Accused were present on the scene at the time of the occurrence, which turned out to be fatal, and that added to their responsibility to give a credible version of their innocence in the dowry death - Appeal liable to be dismissed.
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 304-B
Dowry Death - Appeal against Conviction - Expression 'soon before her death' - Prosecution has 'shown' that Section 304B stands attracted since the death of the wife occurred within seven years of the solemnization of the marriage; indubitably, it was an unnatural death - It has also come in evidence that immediately after her marriage a demand for a scooter was made and this demand recurred with regularity - It is in evidence that about fifteen days prior to the unnatural death of the hapless young wife, her Grandfather PW1 first did not accede to the request of the Accused to send the deceased/victim to her matrimonial house because of their harassment and cruelty towards her for not meeting their demands of dowry - Only when the Accused assured her Grandfather that she would not be ill-treated, that she was sent back to her matrimonial house - The statement of the Mother PW2 is also to the same effect -Plea that that there was no live link between the dowry demand and the death or that the Accused have succeeded in proving that the demand, if any, was of a much earlier vintage repelled - Requirement of Section 304B of the IPC that the dowry demand should be made soon before the death stands satisfied - Prosecution has succeeded in showing, or proving prima facie, that dowry demands had been made by the Accused even shortly before the death of the deceased.
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 304-B
Dowry Death - Standard of Proof - Held that the use of word 'shown' instead of 'proved' in Section 304B IPC indicates that the onus cast on the prosecution would stand satisfied on the anvil of a mere preponderance of probability - In other words, 'shown' will have to be read up to mean 'proved' but only to the extent of preponderance of probability - Thereafter, the word 'deemed' used in that Section is to be read down to require an accused to prove his innocence, but beyond reasonable doubt - The 'deemed' culpability of the accused leaving no room for the accused to prove innocence was, accordingly, read down to a strong 'presumption' of his culpability - However, the accused is required to dislodge this presumption by proving his innocence beyond reasonable doubt as distinct from preponderance of possibility.
Topic(s)-