The Supreme Court has said the in- laws can’t be convicted in cruelty and dowry death cases if the victim or her relatives merely allege cruelty or harassment for dowry without citing specific instances.
“ A prosecution witness who merely uses the word ‘ harassed’ or ‘ tortured’ and does not describe the exact conduct of the accused which, according to him, amounted to harassment or torture may not be believed by the court in cases under Sections 498A and 304B of the IPC,” a bench comprising Justices R. M. Lodha and A. K. Patnaik said.
The bench stressed that the benefit of doubt could be given to the accused in such cases.
Upholding the acquittal of the mother- in- law and younger brother of the husband of a woman who died under mysterious circumstances, the bench said “ the act” of subjecting a woman to cruelty or harassment for dowry had to be established by the prosecution.
Though the court upheld the husband’s conviction, it decided to give the benefit of doubt to his mother and younger brother.
The deceased’s father stated that his daughter talked about harassment by her mother- in- law but did not state the “ exact act” which made his daughter feel harassed, the court pointed out.
Regarding the case of the husband, the court said it was brought on record that he taunted his wife, saying she had come from a “ hungry house”. Thus, there was evidence about his “ exact conduct” — which was absent in the case of his mother or brother.
Though the victim’s brother deposed that his sister complained that her mother- in- law used to “ torture” and “ taunt” her for not bringing dowry, the court said he did not describe the “ exact conduct” on account of which she felt “ tortured and taunted”. “ What is punishable under Section 498A or 304B is the act of cruelty or harassment by the husband or his relative,” the court said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment