Source: Supreme Court 

Why in News?

A bench of  Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia held that in the given case it was not proved that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death in connection with demand for dowry and hence this was not the case of dowry death.           

• The Supreme Court held this in the case of Chabi Karmarkar v. The State of West Bengal. 

What is the Background of Chabi Karmarkar v. The State of West Bengal Case? 

• The deceased and Appellant no.2 were married in March 2003. 
• On 2^nd May 2006 the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself in her matrimonial home. 
• A post mortem was conducted. As per the report of post mortem there were ligature marks and there were no other ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased. 
• First Information Report was filed where it was alleged that the deceased was being harassed on demand of dowry.  
• Therefore, a case was registered under Section 304 B, Section 498A and Section 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 
• The Trial Court convicted teh sister-in-law (Appellant no.1), husband (Appellant no. 2) and mother-in-law of the deceased . 
• The High Court upheld the conviction and sentence in appeal. 
• Consequently, the appeal was filed in the Supreme Court.  

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Court held that the following facts have been proved beyond beyond any doubt: 
  • Deceased died within seven years of marriage. 
  • The death was by suicide in the matrimonial home. 
  • There was harassment at the hands of her in-laws and particularly by the husband. 
  • There was marital discord between husband and wife.  
• The prosecution has examined several witnesses.  
• The Court held that it was clear that the deceased faced harassment and cruelty at the hands of her husband, however, these witnesses did not state that such cruelty and harassment was in connection with demand for dowry. 
• With respect to demand for dowry there were some general statements made which are not sufficient to convict the accused under Section 304B of IPC. 
•  Thus, the Court held that in the present facts the accused can be convicted under Section 306 (Abetment to suicide) and Section 498A of IPC (Cruelty).  
• The conviction under Section 304B (Dowry Death) was however, set aside. 

What is Dowry?

• About 
  • Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 lays down the definition of dowry. 
• Constituents of Dowry 
  • Any property or 
  • Valuable security 
  • Given or agreed to be given directly or indirectly 
• Parties to Dowry 
  • By one party to marriage to other party to marriage 
  • By the parent of either party to marriage or by any other person to either party to marriage or to any other person 
• Time of Dowry 
  • At or before or at any time after marriage in connection with the marriage of the said parties 
• Dowry Does not Include 
  • It does not include dowry or mahr in the case of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies. 

What are the Provisions Relating to “Dowry Death” in Criminal Laws?

What are the Judgments Explaining Essentials of Dowry Death? 

• Charan Singh @ Charanjit Singh v. State of Uttarakhand (2023) 
  • The Court in this case refused to invoke Section 304B of IPC. 
  • The Court held that there were only certain oral averments made regarding demand of motorcycle and land which was also much prior to the incident. 
  • The aforesaid incident does not in any way fulfil the prerequisites required for conviction under Section 304B or for raising the presumption under Section 113B of IEA.  
  • The Court further observed that mere death of the deceased being unnatural within seven years of marriage will not be sufficient to convict the accused under Section 304B and 498A of IPC. 
• Rajinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2015) 
  • There are four ingredients of the offence of dowry death under Section 304 B of IPC: 
    • death of a woman must have been caused by any burns or bodily injury or her death must have occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances 
    • such death must have occurred within seven years of her marriage 
    • soon before her death, she must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband 
    • such cruelty or harassment must be in connection with the demand for dowry. 
• Sher Singh @ Partapa v. State of Haryana (2015) 
  • The Court in this case interpreted the term “soon” as it appears in Section 304 B of IPC. 
  • The word “soon” should not be interpreted in terms of days or months or years. 
  • The demand for dowry should not be stale or an aberration of the past but should be a continuing cause of death under Section 304B. 
  • Once these concomitants are established by prosecution even to the extent of preponderance of probability the initial presumption of innocence is replaced by an assumption of guilt of the accused. 
• Dinesh Seth v. State of NCT of Delhi (2008) 
  • The Court examined the width and scope of two Sections i.e. Section 498A and Section 304B of IPC. 
  • Section 498A of IPC has a wider spectrum as it covers all the cases in which wife is subjected to cruelty by her husband or relative of her husband. 
  • The ingredient of “cruelty” is common to both the Sections but the width and the scope of the two sections is different, in so far as Section 304B deals with cases of death as a result of cruelty or harassment within seven years of marriage and Section 498A deals with all cases where the wife is subjected to cruelty by her husband or relatives of her husband.