Presumptions Relating To Dowry Deaths
What is Dowry Death?
A dowry death occurs when a woman dies due to any burns, bodily injury, or occurs under suspicious circumstances within 7 years of her marriage, and it is shown that she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives over dowry demands.
Legal Framework
Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC): Defines dowry death and prescribes punishment.
Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Provides a legal presumption that if a woman dies under such suspicious circumstances, her husband or relative is presumed to have caused her death unless proven otherwise.
Key Points of Presumption (Section 113B, Evidence Act):
If a woman dies within 7 years of marriage,
And it is shown that she was subjected to cruelty or harassment over dowry,
The court shall presume that the husband or relative of the husband caused her death.
Why are Presumptions Important?
In dowry death cases, direct evidence is often lacking.
The law provides presumptions to help convict accused persons without requiring absolute proof.
The accused must then disprove the presumption with convincing evidence.
Important Case Laws on Presumptions Relating to Dowry Deaths
1. Dul Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1996)
Facts: The deceased died of burns within 3 years of marriage. Evidence showed continuous harassment over dowry.
Issue: Whether presumption under Section 113B applies.
Ruling: Court held that presumption applies once prosecution proves death and cruelty; the burden shifts to accused to rebut it.
Principle: Marks the threshold for invoking presumption.
Significance: Emphasized that direct proof of murder is not necessary; circumstantial evidence and presumption suffice.
2. Rajesh & Ors. v. State of Haryana (2009) (Supreme Court)
Facts: Woman died under suspicious circumstances within 7 years of marriage; allegations of dowry harassment.
Issue: Interpretation of "cruelty or harassment" and scope of presumption under 113B.
Ruling: Supreme Court held that cruelty must be shown by prosecution before presumption arises.
Principle: There must be evidence that dowry harassment existed; mere suspicion is not enough.
Significance: Clarified evidentiary standards for invoking presumption.
3. Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001)
Facts: Woman died due to burns allegedly caused by husband’s cruelty over dowry.
Issue: Whether accused can rebut presumption under 113B.
Ruling: Court held that accused can provide evidence to rebut presumption; if credible, acquittal may follow.
Principle: Presumption is rebuttable but prosecution must first establish basic facts.
Significance: Balanced the need to protect women and ensure fair trial.
4. Rajinder v. State of Punjab (2002)
Facts: The victim died within 7 years of marriage, allegedly after prolonged dowry demands and torture.
Issue: Whether dying declaration of victim can trigger presumption under 113B.
Ruling: Court held that victim’s dying declaration is crucial to prove cruelty.
Principle: Dying declaration forms valid evidence to invoke presumption.
Significance: Highlighted importance of victim’s statements.
5. State of Haryana v. Surender (2010)
Facts: Woman died suspiciously within 7 years; accused claimed accidental death.
Issue: Whether presumption of dowry death applies.
Ruling: Court applied presumption due to evidence of harassment; acquitted only if accused disproves beyond reasonable doubt.
Principle: Accused must present strong evidence to rebut.
Significance: Reinforced prosecution’s advantage once basic facts are established.
6. Tukaram S. Dighole v. State of Maharashtra (2010)
Facts: Death of woman under suspicious circumstances; accused denied dowry harassment.
Issue: Whether medical and circumstantial evidence sufficient to invoke presumption.
Ruling: Court held that presumption can be invoked based on circumstantial evidence and pattern of harassment.
Principle: Direct evidence not mandatory if circumstantial evidence points strongly.
Significance: Expanded scope of evidence admissible.
7. Shanti v. State of Haryana (2015)
Facts: Woman died within 7 years; accused claimed no harassment.
Issue: Extent of burden on accused to rebut presumption.
Ruling: Court held accused must produce credible and convincing evidence to rebut.
Principle: Burden shifts to accused after prosecution establishes basic facts.
Significance: Clarified standards for rebuttal.
Summary of Legal Position
Section 113B creates a legal presumption of guilt against husband or relatives in dowry deaths.
Prosecution must prove:
Death within 7 years of marriage.
Evidence of cruelty or harassment relating to dowry.
Once established, burden shifts to accused to disprove involvement.
The presumption is rebuttable, but requires strong evidence from accused.
Courts rely on circumstantial evidence, dying declarations, and medical evidence.
RELATED Blog
0 comments