Report No. 202

3.7 Role of Courts in Dowry Death Cases

3.7.1 Awakening of the collective consciousness is the need of the day. Change of heart and attitude is what is needed. If man were to regain his harmony with others and replace hatred, greed, selfishness and anger by mutual love, trust and understanding and if woman were to receive education and become economically independent, the possibility of this pernicious social evil dying a natural death may not remain a dream only.

The legislature, realising the gravity of the situation has amended the laws and provided for stringent punishments in such cases and even permitted the raising of presumptions against an accused in cases of unnatural deaths of the brides within the first seven years of their marriage. The Dowry Prohibition Act was enacted in 1961 and has been amended from time to time, but this piece of social legislation, keeping in view the growing menace of the social evil, also does not appear to have served much purpose as dowry seekers are hardly brought to books and convictions recorded are rather few.

Laws are not enough to combat is evil. A wider social movement of educating women of their rights, to conquer the menace, is what is needed more particularly in rural areas where women are still largely uneducated and less aware of their rights and fall an easy prey to their exploitation. The role of courts, under the circumstances assumes greater importance and it is expected that the courts would deal with such cases in a more realistic manner and not allow the criminals to escape on account of procedural technicalities or insignificant lacunae in the evidence as otherwise the criminals would receive encouragement and the victims of crime would be totally discouraged by the crime going unpunished.

The courts are expected to be sensitive in cases involving crime against women. The verdict of acquittal made by the trial court in this case is an apt illustration of the lack of sensitivity on the part of the trial court. It recorded the verdict of acquittal on mere surmises and conjectures and disregarded the evidence of the witnesses for wholly insufficient and insignificant reasons. It ignored the vital factors of the case without even properly discussing the same. (See in Kundula Bale Subrahmanyam v. State of A.P., (1993) 2 SCC 684).

3.7.2 In Kailash Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1987) 2 SCC 631, Avtar Singh, the husband, Kailash Kaur, the mother-in-law and Mahinder Kaur, the sister-in-law were put in trial under Section 302 for setting Amandeep Kaur, the deceased, on fire. The trial court acquitted the husband giving him the benefit of doubt, but convicted Kailash Kaur and Mahinder Kaur under Section 302 and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court confirmed the conviction of Kailash Kaur but acquitted Mahinder Kaur giving her the benefit of doubt.

When the matter came up before the Supreme court, it said, "we have very grave doubts about the legality, propriety and correctness of the decision of High Court insofar as it has acquitted Mahinder Kaur by giving her the benefit of doubt. But since the State has not preferred any appeal, we are not called upon to go into that aspect any further. As regards, conviction of Kailash Kaur, the Court expressed its regret "that the Sessions Judge did not treat this case as a fit case for awarding maximum penalty under the law and that no steps were taken by the State Government before the High Court for enhancement of the sentence.

3.7.3 It will be expedient to refer to the editorial comments prefixed to this case, which read as follow:-

[Ed.: This case is not the first time that the Supreme Court in unequivocal terms has commended death sentence to perpetrators of "gruesome murder of young wives ... as the culmination of a long process of physical and mental harassment and torture for extraction of dowry". A three Judge Bench of the Court speaking through Thakkar, J. in Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab, (1983) 3 SCC 470 : 1983 SCC (Cri.) 681, had clearly enunciated various circumstances which could be treated as 'rarest of the rare' cases in which the accused convicted under Section 302, IPC must be punished with death sentence.

One of the circumstances mentioned under the category 'Anti-social and socially abhorrent nature of the crime' was the "cases of 'bride burning', and what are known as 'dowry deaths' or when murder is committed in order to remarry for the sake of extracting dowry once again or to marry another woman on account of infatuation". The Court felt that in such cases the "collective conscience" of the community "is so shocked that it will expect the holders of the judicial power centre to inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards desirability or otherwise of retaining death penalty". (SCC pp. 487-88, paras 32 and 35).

Notwithstanding the consistent concern of the Court to award deterrent punishment to such bride killers, in the instant case the Sessions Court as well as the High Court preferred sentence of life imprisonment for the accused mother-in-law of the deceased victim. The Supreme Court confirmed the same even though the facts called for the extreme penalty. It is the socio-legal obligation of the Sessions Court and High Courts of the country to award capital punishment in such cases of bride killing so as to produce deterrent effect in consonance with the mandate of the Supreme Court.

Another disturbing feature in the present case is the acquittal of the abettor of the dastardly crime viz. the sister-in-law of the deceased who according to the dying declaration had caught hold of the deceased while the appellant-mother-in-law poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire. Though the trial court had convicted her under Section 302 IPC the High Court acquitted her on ground of benefit of doubt.

The Supreme Court expressed its "grave doubts about the legality, propriety and correctness of the decision of the High Court" in this regard but it was helpless since the State had not preferred any appeal against her acquittal. Thus an abettor of a serious crime escaped punishment due to sheer laxity on the part of the State administration. Again no appeal was taken against the acquittal of the husband by the trial court.

The prosecution must keep in mind the trend set by the Legislature with the enactment of Section 498-A, IPC and the recent amendments to the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Pathak, J., as he then was, speaking for the Court in Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, (1983) 3 SCC 344 had made significant suggestions regarding creation of a special magisterial machinery for prompt investigation of such incidents, need for adoption of efficient investigative techniques and procedures taking into account peculiar features of such cases, association of a female police officer of sufficient rank and status with the investigation from its very inception, and extension of application of Coroners' Act, 1871 to other cities besides those where it operates already. It is for the Government to implement these suggestions.]

Back

Index

Next