The essentials of dowry death and its comparison with abetment of
suicide by a married woman within 7 years of her marriage.
Introduction
India being a secular country, there is a diversity of customs followed by
people of different religions during countless occasions. In this context,
dowry is an age-old custom where parents of the bride, give gifts of
property, cash and what not to the bridegroom and his family at the time of
marriage.
Many a times, the young girls were tortured, subjected to cruelty and
violence, causing death to them, in the greed of more dowry by their in –
laws families. This phenomenon of dowry death was vital in activating the
women’s movement in post – independence India in the 1980’s.
To protect women’s right to life, section 304-B was inserted in the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 by an amendment in 1986. As per the explanation
attached to this section, dowry shall have the same meaning as enshrined in
section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Along with that, sections 113-A and 113-B were inserted in the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 by the Criminal Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 1983
in order to deal effectively not only with cases of dowry death, but also
cases of cruelty to married women by their in-laws.
Dowry death – the cruelty towards women
According to the statistical studies, the number of dowry deaths has
increased from 19 per day in 2001 to 52 in 2019. The provision under
section 304-B states that if death is caused to a woman by burns or bodily
injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances in connection with the
demand for dowry, within seven years of marriage shall be deemed to be
dowry death. Also, it must be revealed that soon before her death, she was
exposed to cruelty or harassment – whether physical or mental, by her
husband or any other relative.
Another important feature of this section is that, the minimum punishment
for this offence is imprisonment for a term of 7 years but this may extend to
imprisonment for life. In MUSTAFA SHAHBODAL SHAIKH v. STATE
OF MAHARASHTRA1, the deceased died in matrimonial home within 7
months of marriage. The accused husband and his family were alone in the
house at the time of the incident. A clear evidence was there, as 5 days prior
to her death, she narrated torture meted out to her on account of dowry
demand to her grandfather and parents. The accused husband was held
liable under section 304-B of the IPC.
According to section 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, the
offence under section 304-B is a non bailable, cognizable offence. In
DASRATH v. STATE OF M.P.2, the supreme court held that, in the absence
of corpus delicti i.e. facts constituting the offence or substance/ gist of the
fact of offences, the conviction of the accused is not vitiated.
Presumption as to dowry death – section 113B of Evidence Law
In matrimonial cases it is difficult to get evidence, so presumption is very
necessary. Where the wife was last seen alive in the company of her
husband and her death was unnatural and homicidal, by virtue of section
106 of the Indian Evidence Act, he is accountable as to the circumstances of
her death because he alone must have known about them.
The basic burden is on the prosecution to establish the requirements for the
application of the presumption whereas the onus is on the accused to rebut
1
(2012) IV Cri. L.J. 4763 (S.C.)
2
(2010) IV Cri. L.J. 4382 (S.C.)
the presumption under section 113-B. The presumption of dowry death
arises from the fact that the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment
“soon before death” for the demand of dowry within 7 years of marriage.
In KUNHIABDULLA v. STATE OF KERALA3, cruelty and harassment
“soon before death” means that there should be live and proximate link
between cruelty and death. No straight jacket formula can be laid down as to
the length of time to be considered, as it is a relative expression. The court
has to apply its mind according to the facts and circumstances of each case.
In other words, the gap of time should not be so long that no impact
remained on the mental equilibrium of the target woman, that section 304-B
could not be invoked.
Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman within 7
years of marriage – section 113-A of the Evidence Law
When a woman is married with all the fanfare of religious ceremonies, her
husband is considered to be her protector. But peril originates from her own
husband, it is like killing takes place inside the protection of a home, where
independent and outside evidence is generally not available.
Thus, section 113-A creates a presumption against the husband and his
family that even if it was a case of suicide, the family must have abetted it
by practicing cruelty upon her. This may be called the presumption of
abetment which will be taken into account by the court only after
considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
The essential conditions for the presumption to are include, whether the
commission of suicide by the married woman was the result of abetment by
her husband or his relatives, along with that there should be some evidence
to show that she was subjected to cruelty by her husband and his relatives.
3
A.I.R. 2004 S.C. 1731
The third most important ingredient remains the time span of 7 years of
marriage.
In STATE OF RAJASTHAN v. RAMANAND4, the accused was
prosecuted to cause death to his wife and daughter by setting them ablaze,
whose dead bodies were found in a room where they lastly resided. The
medical report revealed that it was a homicidal death by strangulation. Their
marriage was of ten years and there was no evidence to show presence of
the accused at the time of the incident. Also, the evidence of dowry demand
was not reliable and no motive could be shown. Hence, the court gave the
accused, the benefit of doubt.
Section 304-B IPC & Section 113-A Evidence Act – comparison
concluded
The ingredients of section 304-B, IPC and section 113-A, Evidence Act, are
somewhat similar. But they diverge from each other to some extent. Where
the dowry death states that the woman subjected to cruelty of harassment by
her husband and in – laws, in demand of dowry dies within 7 years of
marriage, section 113-A creates a presumption. It clearly refers to one of the
essentials of abetment under section 107 IPC, i.e. instigation, conspiracy
and intentional aiding of the act and the woman commits suicide by such
means. Also, there is a possibility that, in case of dowry death, where the
conduct of the accused indicated that he did not want her to die even though
he might have treated her cruelly earlier, it cannot be presumed that he
abetted the suicide.
Thus, by this alarming increase in the number of cases of dowry death, there
is a need to cope up with this problem in order to safeguard the interest of
women along with their families as it takes a lot to marry a daughter and a
4
A.I.R. 2017 S.C. 2100
lot more to see her dead by her parents, only because of money and some
material things.
References
1. Dowry death under section 304 -B IPC: (18 July,2020) retrieved
from: https://blog.ipleaders.in/dowry-death/
2. Presumptions as to dowry death: (18 July,2020) retrieved from:
https://www.latestlaws.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/02/Presumption-as-to-Dowry-Death-By-
Divyansh-Hanu.pdf
3. Comparison between dowry death and abetment of suicide by a
married woman within 7 years of marriage: (18 July,2020) retrieved
from: http://legalservicesindia.com/articles/pre_mat.htm
