Chapter XVI of the Indian Penal Code covers the offences affecting the human

body. Section 304B under the said Chapter deals with ‘Dowry Death’. The
Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986 under section 10 amended the
Indian Penal Code and inserted the provision of dowry death under section
304B.

Therefore, to that effect, the Act further inserted certain entries in the First
Schedule of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and section 113B was
introduced in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. In the case of Shanti v. State of
Haryana[i], the Supreme Court observed that the introduction of section 304B
in the Indian Penal Code is done with a view to combat the increasing menace
of dowry deaths.

Section 304B-

Section 304B is a provision which is peculiar in its scope and applicability. The
provision is given wider scope as to cover all deaths of wives who are dead
within seven years of marriage, the presumption of offence provides this scope.
Further, the provision is applicable if the following essentials are present in the
offence committed-

1. The death of a woman should have been caused by burns or bodily injury or
it should occur that the death is not caused under normal circumstances

2. Death should have occurred within 7 years of marriage

3. It should be established that soon before her death, she was subjected to
cruelty and harassment by her husband or his relatives

4. The cruelty or harassment should have been in connection with any demand
for dowry.

In the case of Shamnsaheb M  Multtani v. State of Karnataka[ii], the Supreme

Court held that, the peculiar situation in respect of an offence under section
304B is that the Court has a statutory compulsion on establishing that the death
of wife has not occurred under normal circumstances and the wife was
subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband or his relatives soon before
her death, to presume that the offence under this provision is committed by
husband or his relatives. The Court shall act upon the presumption of
commission of offence unless and until it is disproved by the accused.

Death Under Unnatural Circumstances-

The significant aspect in establishing the dowry death is that death should be an
unnatural death. In the case of Akula Ravinder v. State of Andhra Pradesh[iii],
the Supreme Court held that where it is emphasised that death must be proved to
be one out of the course of nature and the mere fact that the deceased was young
and death was not an accident is not sufficient to establish that death must have
occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances. Therefore, the fact of
unnatural death must be established beyond a reasonable doubt.

Further, in the case of Shanti v. State of Haryana[iv], the Supreme Court held
that if the actions of husband or his relatives at the time of death of the wife is
doubtful, then the Court shall act in accordance with the presumption that the
offence under Section 304B is committed. In the instant case, where husband
and his relatives upon the death of the wife did not allow wife’s father and
brother to see her and cremated the body in a hurry, the Court presumed the
commission of offence under section 304B by the husband and his relatives.

The Court refuses to consider the plea of accident by the accused in cases under
this provision if there is sufficient proof to establish the unnatural circumstances
of death in the post-mortem report. In the case of Ashok Kumar v. State of
Rajasthan[v], the accused person’s sister deposed before the Court stating that
the death of the victim was caused due to an accident that occurred while she
was making tea. But the post-mortem report indicated that the smell of kerosene
was there in the body and even the burnt hair was smelling kerosene. This fact
established the unnatural circumstances of death as opposed to the depositions
of the accused person’s sister and hence the Court convicted the accused of an
offence under section 304B of IPC.
Cruelty and Harassment soon before the death’-

Along with the afore-mentioned aspect of unnatural death, the provision also
requires proof of cruelty and harassment soon before the death occurred by the
husband or his relatives in connection with any demand for dowry. In the case
of Bansi Lal v. State of Haryana[vi], the Apex Court ruled that the Court has to
analyse the facts and circumstances as leading to death of the victim and decide
if there is any proximate connection between the demand for dowry and the act
of cruelty or harassment and the death.

Another important aspect to be considered in establishing the offence under this

provision is that the act of cruelty or harassment by the husband or his relatives
should have been occurred ‘soon before the death’. This expression ‘soon
before the death’ has been clarified by the Courts in many cases as the interval
between the act of cruelty and death should not be much.

In the case of Mustafa Shahdal Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra[vii], the

Supreme Court held that if the alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and
has become state enough not to disturb mental equilibrium of the woman
concerned, then such cruelty cannot be considered while tracing the reasons for
death of the victim.

Demand for Dowry as the reason for cruelty or harassment-

The fact of cruelty and harassment should be established in connection with the
demand for dowry. In the case of Patil Paresh Kumar Jayanti Lal v. State of
Gujarat[viii], the Court considering the facts of the case where husband had
caused the death of his wife and it was revealed that he had killed his wife for
not satisfying his dowry demand but there was no evidence to establish the
involvement of the co-accused in-laws with respect to dowry demand. Hence,
the court convicted only the husband under Section 304B and the co-accused in-
laws were held not guilty under section 304B.
The statutory time frame for the application of the rule of
presumption-

The presumption by the Court shall be raised as to the commission of offence

by the husband or his relatives only upon the proof that the above-mentioned
essentials of the offence. It is also necessary that all the essentials have to be
present within seven years of marriage, as the rule of presumption under this
provision will not be enforced beyond the statutory time period.

In the case of Ratan Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh[ix], the Court held that if
the prosecution fails to prove that the death did not occur within the prescribed
period of seven years of marriage, the provision under section 304B will not be
applied.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the punishment prescribed for the offence of dowry death?

Punishment- Sub-section (2) of Section 304B prescribes punishment for the

offence of dowry death. The punishment is imprisonment which shall not be
less than a term of seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.

Edited b