Presumption U/S 113B Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked By Prosecution If It Fails To Prove Ingredients Of Dowry Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, while acquitting in-laws of the victim of the charges of dowry death, observed that once all the necessary ingredients of dowry death have not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act would not be available to the prosecution.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Appeal challenging a High Court judgment that upheld the Appellants' conviction under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. The High Court had partially allowed the Appeal, reducing the sentence from 10 years to 7 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC while maintaining the 1-year sentence under Section 498-A IPC.
The bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra observed, “…once all the necessary ingredients of dowry death have not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act would not be available to the prosecution.”
Brief Facts-
The Appellants who were the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the victim were convicted under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC for her dowry-related death. The victim died of severe burn injuries in her matrimonial home within a year of her marriage. Her father alleged that she was harassed over dowry demands for a motorcycle and Rs. 50k. The trial Court convicted the Appellants, presuming dowry harassment as the cause of death. The Appellants denied the charges and claimed that the victim committed suicide, but the conviction was upheld. Hence, the present Appeal.
The Court said, “What is important is that the presumption under Section 113-B is not in respect of commission of an act of cruelty, or harassment, in connection with any demand for dowry, which is one of the essential ingredients of the offence of ‘dowry death’. The presumption, however, is in respect of commission of the offence of ‘dowry death’ by the accused when all the essential ingredients of ‘dowry death’ are proved beyond reasonable doubt by ordinary rule of evidence, which means that to prove the essential ingredients of an offence of ‘dowry death’ the burden is on the prosecution.”
The Court further observed, “Merely because a piece of evidence is admissible does not mean that it must be accepted. Before accepting the evidence to hold that the fact in issue stands proved beyond reasonable doubt, the Court must evaluate the same against the weight of surrounding circumstances and other facts proven on record.”
The Court noted that in the present case, one of the essential ingredients of dowry death, namely, any demand for dowry, was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the order convicting and sentencing the Appellants under Section 304-B and 498-A IPC.
Finally, the Court allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Shoor Singh v. State of Uttarakhand (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 713)