HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2423 OF 2004 Dated 08-02-2011 Between: State of A.P., rep. by PP ……..Appellant Vs. Smt Masoom Begum and 4 others. ………Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2423 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This is an appeal arises out of the acquittal of the accused in S.C.No.400 of 2003 by the II Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District on 02.08.2004. The accused 1 to 5 were prosecuted for an offence under Section 304-B IPC alleging that the marriage of the deceased by name Shakeera Fathima with one Rajala Ali who is the son of A1, A3 and brother of A2, A4. At the time of marriage of the deceased, the parents of the deceased gave Rs.50,000/-, 5 tulas of gold, household articles worth of Rs.3.00 lakhs to Rajala Ali. The deceased and her husband lived happily and after one month of the marriage Rajala Ali went to Dubai as he was working there even prior to the marriage. Since then all the accused started ill-treating the deceased on petty issues and also harassing physically and mentally that if the marriage of Rajala Ali performed with another girl, they would have got Rs.10.00 lakhs and on the complaint by deceased, Rajala Ali also advised the accused not to harass the deceased. Even on the information the complainant herein being the mother of the deceased requested the accused to stop the harassment and consoled the deceased. Prior to the incident Rajala Ali came to his house and 15 days prior to the incident again left for Dubai advising his parents, brother and sister not to harass the deceased. On 16.5.2003 prior to 10.30 a.m A1 to A3 and A5 quarreled and beaten the deceased on the ground that the milk was broken or spoiled. Again at about 12.30 p.m the complainant received phone message from the neighbours of the accused that the deceased has received burn injuries and admitted in the Gandhi Hospital for treatment. On receipt of the information, the Sub Inspector of Police sent requisition for recording the dying declaration by the concerned Magistrate. The Investigating Officer has visited the scene of offence along with the panchas and conducted the scene of offence Panchanama and then seized one plastic kerosene tin, match box, half burnt bed sheet and chunny of the deceased in the presence of panchas and also prepared a rough sketch describing the scene of offence and also got the scene of offence photographed. Then the Medical Officer conducted the autopsy, issued a report that the deceased died due to shock, due to burns. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the A.1 to A.5 by showing A-5 was absconding. The lower Court has framed the charge under Section 304-B against A.1 to A.4 and all of them pleaded not guilty for the said charge. In order to establish the said charge, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 15 and Exs.P.1 to P.15 and M.Os.1 to 4 were marked. The lower court after taking consideration of both oral and documentary evidence found the accused 1 to 4 not guilty of the offence under Section 304-B IPC and thereby acquitted under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by the said acquittal, the State has preferred the present appeal. The main contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that the lower court has not taken into consideration of the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 4 who spoke about the harassment caused to the deceased by the accused demanding for additional dowry which resulted the death of the deceased. Thus, the only point that arises for consideration whether the prosecution could able to establish that the accused has harassed demanding for additional dowry prior to her death? There is no dispute with regard to the death of the deceased due to burn injuries and in order to establish the offence under Section 304-B IPC, the prosecution has to establish that the death of the woman was caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with any demand for dowry. In the present case, admittedly the death of the deceased is due to burns and she died within seven years of her marriage. Therefore, the next point that has to be established by the prosecution is that soon before her death, she was subjected for cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relatives of her husband in connection with any demand for dowry. In order to establish the demand for dowry, the learned Public Prosecution relied upon the evidence of P.W.1 who is the mother of the deceased. P.W.1 has stated about her giving Rs.50,000/- cash and 10 tulas of gold at the time of her daughter’s marriage along with household articles and she has stated that after her son-in-law went to Dubai, A-1 and A-2 used to beat her daughter to bring money from her. A.3 also joined hands with A-1 and A-2 demanded her daughter to bring money from her. A-4 and A-5 also supported A-1 and A-2. All the accused used to harass her daughter stating that if they performed the marriage of his son-in-law with another girl, they would have got more dowry. Therefore, the allegations made by P.W.1 against the accused with regard to demand for additional money is not specific but only general allegations made against them. More over as admitted by P.Ws.1 that prior to the incident, the husband of the deceased came down to city and immediately left to Dubai again on his employment and she has admitted in her cross-examination that at no point of time, the matter was reported before the elders or any meeting was held in that regard in the house of the accused. P.W.2 is the father-in-law of P.W.1 and he also stated about giving of dowry and house hold articles at the time of marriage and when the deceased husband left for Dubai, A.1 and A.3 started demanding for additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- on the ground that they obtained loan and also they would get more dowry if they performed marriage of Rajla Ali with another girl and the mother of the deceased expressed her inability to provide the additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/-. The said factum of demanding of Rs.1,00,000/- on the ground that they have incurred loan was not spoken by P.W.1. P.W.4 who is the relative of the deceased only came to know through P.W.1 about the harassment caused by the accused to the deceased. Therefore, none of the witnesses of P.Ws.1 to 4 have specifically spoken about the harassment caused by the deceased in connection with demand for dowry. Even in the complaint Ex.P.1 it is only mentioned about the payment of Rs.50,000/-, 5 tulas of gold and furniture and house hold articles worth Rs.3,00,000/- at the time of marriage and nothing was alleged in the said complaint about the accused demanding her for getting money from her but it is only alleged that if their son was married with another girl, they would have got Rs.10.00 lakhs as dowry. Therefore, the prosecution could not able to establish that prior to her death, the accused subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand of dowry. The lower court while discussing about the dying declaration said to have given by the deceased come to the conclusion that the alleged dying declaration appears to be in correct and with regard to harassment, the lower court has held that P.Ws.1 and 2 are interested witnesses and there is no acceptable evidence that the deceased was harassed by the accused prior to her death and thereby given benefit of doubt to the accused. In view of the above said discussion, I do not find any reasons to differ with the finding given by the lower court. Hence, the prosecution could not able to establish the offence under Section 304-B IPC against the accused. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. _____________________ P.DURGA PRASADJ. Date:08.02.2011 Gk. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2423 OF 2004 Dated 08-02-2011 Gk.