The Circuit Bench at Port Blair Overturns Discharge of Accused In-Laws in a Case Involving Alleged Dowry Demands and Gender Discrimination
In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court's Circuit Bench at Port Blair has set aside the discharge order of four in-laws accused in a dowry death case, reinstating charges against them. The judgment, delivered by Justice Apurba Sinha Ray, reverses the earlier decision of the Sessions Court, which had discharged the accused in-laws, citing insufficient evidence.
The case revolves around the tragic death of Bhawna, who allegedly committed suicide after killing her one-and-a-half-year-old daughter in Andaman. Initially, a complaint was lodged against unknown persons under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequent investigations led to charges against Bhawna's husband and four of her in-laws under Sections 498(A), 304(B), and 34 IPC, implicating them in dowry demands and cruel treatment towards Bhawna due to the birth of a girl child.
The Sessions Court had earlier discharged the in-laws from the case, finding sufficient evidence only against Bhawna's husband, Neeraj Sharma. However, the father of the deceased challenged this decision, arguing that the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC provided prima facie evidence against all accused. Justice Sinha Ray agreed with this contention, noting that the statements indicated persistent dowry demands and mental cruelty inflicted by the in-laws.
The High Court emphasized that the statements of Bhawna's relatives revealed consistent demands for dowry, especially after the birth of her daughter, and the consequential harassment she faced. The judgment also highlighted the societal issue of gender discrimination, reflecting on the tragic death of Rudrika, Bhawna's young daughter, as a stark reminder of the long journey towards achieving gender equality.
Justice Sinha Ray ordered the reinstatement of charges against the in-laws, directing them to appear before the Sessions Court for further proceedings. The court underscored the importance of considering prima facie evidence at the charge-framing stage, rather than delving into the evidentiary value of witness statements.
This ruling not only revives the legal proceedings against the accused in-laws but also serves as a poignant reminder of the deep-rooted challenges surrounding dowry demands and gender discrimination in society.
Bottom Line:
Dowry demand and gender discrimination alleged as cause for abetment to suicide of wife and murder of child - Discharge of accused persons under Sections 498(A)/304(B)/34 IPC set aside due to the presence of prima facie evidence showing complicity.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 498(A), 304(B), 306, 34, 113B; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 161; Evidence Act, 1872 Section 113B.
Jagjit Kumar v. State, (Calcutta)(Circuit Bench at Port Blair) : Law Finder Doc id # 2850121
