CASE ANALYSIS ON THE CASE OF

DEEN DAYAL V STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

BY-
ANUMEHA JAIN
2ND YEAR
INTERN
NEW LAW COLLEGE
BHARATI VIDYAPEETH UNIVERSITY
PUNE
EMAIL – anumehajain8@gmail.com

26th APRIL 2020

 BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

Asha Devi, the deceased in the present case, was married to Amar Singh in June 1997. On 6 th
September, 1998, after fifteen months of their marriage, she died. Asha Devi was living with the
Appellants at the time of her death. The dead body of the deceased was taken out from a well
situated at a distance of about four hundred paces from the house of the Appellants. There were
two injuries found on the dead body by the doctor who did post-mortem on her body:-

1. Swelling 3X3 cm in front upper part of nose.

2. Swelling mark 5X5 cm on top and middle of head.

According to the Appellant, Asha Devi went to the well to fetch water and she dropped down
and the injuries were caused from the wall of well and she died. But, according to the
Prosecution, the injuries were caused by two projections, since it was a kuccha well, Asha Devi
was smashed with some projections and then she was thrown into the well.

The prosecution side also said the appellant side always asked the deceased to get Rs.10,000 and
a golden chain for her husband, Amar Singh, since her family has given all the things which they
possibly give during the marriage, therefore, they were in no condition to give more. In a
statement by the father of the deceased, he even said that Asha Devi came home and said that if
the money and gold chain will not be provided then the appellant family will arrange for a
second marriage for Amar Singh. Before two months of the death of Asha Devi, appellant 3,
DeenDayal, father-in-law of the deceased came to PW-1 house to take back Asha Devi and he
again demanded for gold chain and money and since PW-1 was not able to give anything more,
he took Asha Devi with him in anger, and after two months, Asha Devi was found death in the
well.

ISSUES RAISED
1. Whether the deceased actually died by falling in the well.
2. Whether it was dowry death and dowry was demanded or not.
3. Whether after solemnization of marriage the deceased was treated with cruelty and was
harassed.
 ARGUMENTS FROM THE APPELANT SIDE

1. The death body of the deceased was found in the well and the only possible reason for
death could be the deceased falling inside the well, hurting herself from the walls of the
well and then drowning into the water, which eventually caused her death.
2. The deceased was not treated with cruelty or was harassed, as the defense witness said
that the appellants use to keep Asha Devi with a lot of love and affection and that he
himself saw Asha Devi slipping and falling into the well.

ARGUMENTS FROM THE PROSECTUION SIDE

1. Section 498A1 states “Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to

cruelty”. In the present case, the deceased was subjected to cruelty, her in-laws and her
husband use to beat her and ask her for more dowry, she was subjected to mental as well
as physical cruelty.
2. Section 113A2 states “Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman’, as per
this section, “if the woman commits suicide before 7 years of her marriage and that she
was subjected to cruelty by her husband or his relative, then it is presumed that such
suicide has been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband.” Asha Devi
was subjected to cruelty and she died before 7 years of her marriage, therefore, the same
can be assumed.
3. Section 304B3talks about dowry death, if a woman dies under circumstances which are
not normal and before 7 years of her marriage and it can be shown that dowry was
demanded and she was subjected to cruelty and harassment then such a death shall be
called “dowry death”. In the present case, the reason for death of Asha Devi was not by
falling into the well, she was treated with cruelty and harassed and even dowry was
demanded, therefore, it is true to say that it was dowry death.

1
Indian Penal Code 1860
2
Indian Evidence Act 1872
3
Indian Penal Code 1860
 4. Section 4(1)4states that “if any person demands dowry directly or indirectly, from the
parents or other relatives or guardian of the bride or bridegroom as the case may be, any
dowry, he shall be punishable”, the appellants in this case repeatedly asked for dowry
from the bride, Asha Devi, the deceased, and her family for dowry

LEGAL ASPECT

In the context of information, there are three concepts essentials to understand:-

1. Dowry
2. Dowry Death
3. Cruelty and harassment

Dowry

Dowry is defined in section 25 which states “’dowry’ means any property or valuable security
given or agreed to be given directly or indirectly:

a. By one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage; or

b. By the parents of either party to a marriage or by any other person, to either party to the
marriage or to any other person; at or before or any time after the marriage in connection
with the marriage of said parties but does not include dower or mahr in the case of
persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies.”

In India, the dowry is given by the bride’s family to the bridegroom’s family. It is believed that
dowry is given to the groom’s family at the time of wedding so that the bride will have
everything she needsand she is happy. Dowry can be any valuable thing, like property, vehicle,
furniture, or even cash. Though the practice of dowry is illegal in India, it is still practice in some
regions of India. Dowry is practiced since a very ancient time; the custom of dowry is deep-
rooted in the Indian society over the years. Sometimes dowry becomes so important in a

4
Dowry Prohibition Act 1961
5
Dowry Prohibition Act 1961
marriage that if the required amount of dowry is not given then the situation of dowry death or
divorce arises, in some cases dowry is demanded before marriage and it is not given then the
marriage is cancelled. The problem of dowry has become devilish and has to be taken by the
law-makers.

In the case of InderSain and Another v State6 the groom asked the father of the bride for
refrigerator at the time of marriage and clothes for the relatives to give at the time of marriage
were also demanded, the cash for following two things were given to the groom and his relatives
at the time of marriage. Soon after the marriage, the parents of the groom started demanding for
a television set for which cash was again given. The demand from the groom’s side continued
even after marriage, the groom along with his parents use to beat the bride and use to ask her as
well as her family for more dowry, the father of the bride was also attacked by the groom, his
father and some other goondas when the demand of the dowry was not fulfilled.

In the present case, Amar Singh, husband of the deceased, along with his parents uses to beat
Asha Devi and use to ask her for more dowry. When DeenDayal, father of Amar Singh went to
bring back Asha Devi from her maternal house, he asked for dowry and when the parents of
Asha Devi were not able to fulfill the demand of dowry, DeenDayal got angry and took Asha
Devi along with himself. Amar Singh along with his parents use to treat the deceased with
cruelty and use to harass her. Amar Singh and DeenDayal continuously use to demand for Rs.
10,000 and a golden chain, even when the parents of Asha Devi said that they gave all they have
during marriage and they have nothing to give now still there was a continuous demand from
Amar Singh and his family.

Similarly, in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh vNikku Ram and Others7, the husband
along with his mother and sister use to taunt the deceased for bringing in less dowry along with
her at the time of marriage. They use to demand for electric fan, television, etc and use to treat
the deceased with cruelty and use to harass her. The mother in-law of the deceased once gave her
a blow with a sickle like object due to which the deceased got wounded on her forehead, she was
not able to tolerate this much torture and she eventually took naphthalene balls ad died.

6
InderSain and another v State [1981] Indlaw DEL 17
7
State of Himachal Pradesh v Nikku Ram and Others[1995] Indlaw SC 1201
Amar Singh along with his mother and father use to torture Asha Devi and use to treat her with
cruelty and harass her. The demand for dowry never stopped, even when the parents of Asha
Devi gave Amar Singh and his family all they could give, still they use to demand for more and
more things. It is clearly mentioned in the statement of the prosecution witnesses that dowry was
demanded from Asha Devi and her family from Amar Singh and his family, they even treated
her with cruelty and use to harass her.

Dowry Death

Section 304B of Indian Penal Code, 1860, talks about “Dowry Death” it is explained as:-

(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise
than under normal circumstances within 7 years of her marriage and it is shown that soon
before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any
relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death
shall be called “Dowry Death”, and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have
caused her death.
(2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which
shall not be less than 7 years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.8

Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, talks about “Presumption as to Dowry Death.-
When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is
shown that soon before her death such woman has been subjected by such person to cruelty or
harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such
person had caused the dowry death.”

Dowry death is called as dowry murder. It is when a married woman kills herself or is killed by
her husband or his relatives because they are dissatisfied with the dowry. Dowry death usually
occurs when the married woman is not able to bear the torture, cruelty and harassment which her
husband or in-laws practice on her. Bride burning, suicide, poisoning, brutally beating the wife

8
Indian Penal Code 1860
until she is dead, etc are some of the ways in which dowry death takes place in India. It is
believed that India has the highest number of dowry related death.

In Kashmira Devi v State of Uttarakhand and others 9the deceased was burnt alive due to which
she died. The main reason behind burning the deceased was the non-fulfillment of the dowry
demand. The deceased was ill-treated and was brutally beaten by her husband, father in-law,
mother in-law, brother of his husband and his wife. The decease often use to come to her
maternal home and use to complain about the cruelty on her and about the more dowry which her
in-laws use to ask from her. Even though the father of the deceased gave everything that he could
give at the time of marriage still the demand for dowry never stopped.

In the present case, the father of the deceased gave everything that he could give at the time of
marriage but still the demand for dowry continues. The husband, father in-law and other in-law
of Asha Devi use to treat her with cruelty and use to harass her. Asha Devi use to come to her
maternal house and use to complain about the demand for dowry as well as the cruelty and
harassment which was practiced on her. The main reason behind killing or murdering Asha Devi
was the non-fulfillment of dowry demand by the parents of Asha Devi.

In the case of Kans Raj vState of Punjab and Others10there were 5 points which were laid down.
“The law as it exists now provides that where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or
bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within 7 years of marriage
and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her
husband or any relative for or in connection with any demand of dowry such death shall be
punishable under section 304B. In order to seek a conviction against a person for the offence of
dowry death, the prosecution is obliged to prove that:

(a) The death of a woman was caused by burns or bodily injury or had occurred otherwise
than under normal circumstances;
(b) Such death should have occurred within 7 years of her marriage;
(c) The deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or by any relative of
her husband;
(d) Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with the demand of dowry; and
9
Kashmira Devi v State of Uttarakhand and others[2020] Indlaw SC 81
10
Kans Raj v State of Punjab and Others[2000] Indlaw SC 305
 (e) To such cruelty or harassment the deceased should have been subjected to soon before
her death. As and when the aforesaid circumstances are established, a presumption of
dowry death shall be drawn against the accused under section 113B of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872.”

In the case of DeenDayal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, the following five points which were laid
down in the case of Kans Raj vs. the State of Punjab And Others are fulfilled:-

(a) The injuries on the body of the deceased were occurred otherwise and would have not
been caused in the normal circumstances.
(b) The death of Asha Devi has occurred within the 7 years of her marriage.
(c) Asha Devi has faced cruelty and harassment from her husband as well as from her father
in-law and father in-law.
(d) Dowry was continuously demanded from Asha Devi and her parents and since the
demand of dowry was not fulfilled therefore she was treated with cruelty and harassment.
(e) Asha Devi was subjected to cruelty and harassment soon before her death.

Since all the five points are fulfilled, therefore it can be assumed that Asha Devi died of dowry
death.

Even in the case of Mohammad Ishaq and Others v State of Uttar Pradesh 11the bride was killed
because of non fulfillment of the dowry demand. The dowry was demanded again and again, and
since the parents of the wife were not able to pay therefore, the bride was killed and it was a
dowry death.

MonjuRoj and Others v State of West Bengal 12is a case in which the deceased, who was the
bride in this case, was asked for Rs. 50,000 as dowry, which was not given by the bride’s family
at the time of marriage. The mother in-law along with her two daughters uses to treat the
deceased with cruelty and use to harass her a lot. She was not even given food to eat. The bride
was not able to tolerate the cruelty and harassment and so she poured kerosene oil on herself and
died, this case will also come under dowry death, since the bride died because of the cruelty and

11
Mohammad Ishaq and Others v State of Uttar Pradesh[2020] Indlaw ALL 200
12
MonjuRoj and Others v State of West Bengal[2015] Indlaw SC 283
harassment which was practiced on her by her mother in-law and sister in-law for the non
fulfillment of the dowry demand and the death was not a natural death.

In the above two cases, the demand for dowry was not fulfilled and so the bride either killed
herself or was killed by someone else. In the present case as well the demand for dowry was not
fulfilled and so the bride was killed by her husband along with his parents and her dead body was
thrown into the kuccha well.

Cruelty and Harassment

Section 498A 13explains cruelty as “Husband or relative of the husband of a woman subjecting
her to cruelty.- Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects
such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation.- For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means-

(a) Any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to
commitsuicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental
or physical) of the woman; or
(b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any
person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security
or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.”

Cruelty is practiced on married women by their husband or in-laws in order to get dowry from
them. Cruelty can be in the form of harassment or torture which can be abusive in nature.
Harassment and torture comprises of physical abuse which consist of beating up of a woman,
sexual abuse which consist of forced or unwanted sexual conduct, financial abuse which means
the woman is not given money for her needs, physiological abuse in which the woman mental
pressure is put upon the wife, all these types of abuses are done on the woman to gain more
dowry from her or her maternal home.

13
Indian Penal Code 1860
In the case of U. Suvetha v State by Inspector of Police and Another14the respondent wife was
treated with cruelty, the appellant husband use to stay away from her and the wife use to stay
with her mother in-law. Dowry demand from the respondent was made on a continuous basis. In
this case, the ingredients of 498A of Indian Penal Code were given, which are:-“

a) The woman must be married;

b) She must be subjected to cruelty or harassment; and
c) Such cruelty or harassment must have been shown either by husband of the woman or
by the relatives of her husband.”

Since all the ingredients from the case of U. Suvetha vs. State by Inspector of Police And
Another are fulfilled in the case of DeenDayal vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh, therefore, it can be
said that Asha Devi was subjected to cruelty and harassment because the demand of dowry was
not fulfilled by her family and the same was the reason of her death.

In G.V. Siddaramesh v State of Karnataka15 case, there was a huge demand of dowry from the
groom’s family, which includes cash, gold and even a motor vehicle. The negotiation was done
from both the side and the required amount of cash, gold and motor vehicle was given to
groom’s family. The deceased wife in the present case told her elder sister about the cruelty
which was practiced on her as well as the demand for more dowry. The husband of the deceased
was not maintaining a physical relationship with her; she was even being beaten by her husband.
The ingredients of the Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code are also fulfilled in this case. The
appellant husband has to undergo imprisonment for 6 years.

In case of Asha Devi, dowry was demanded and the family of Asha Devi gave as much as they
could give at the time of marriage. After the solemnization of marriage, more and more dowry
was demanded from Asha Devi and her family, since the family of Asha Devi was not able to
fulfill more of the demand due to insufficient funds with them, therefore Asha Devi was treated
with cruelty and eventually she was killed by her husband along with his parents.

In the case of Hari Om v State of Haryana and another 16, the bride Poonam was married
HariOm, dowry was demanded at the time of marriage along with some gifts for the relatives of
14
U. Suvetha v State by Inspector of Police and Another[2009] Indlaw SC 652
15
G.V. Siddaramesh v State of Karnataka[2010] Indlaw SC 83
16
Hari Om v State of Haryana and another [2014] Indlaw SC 761
the groom. After the marriage more dowry was demanded and it was said by the parents of the
from that if more dowry was not given than they would not let Poonam let live with them.
Poonam was sent back to her maternal home and the parents of Hari Om told the parents of
Poonam to send her back when the demanded dowry is given to them. Poonamreceived a call
from Hari Om, he reminded him of the dowry, Poonam became tensed and poisoned herself. All
the appellants were punished with life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment for 2-10 years
along with fine.

In the case of Hem Chand v State of Haryana 17, the appellant Hem Chand married the deceased
and after two months of the marriage the appellant started demanding for more dowry in the
form of T.V and fridge. The father of the deceased gave the required amount for the same, after
some time more dowry was demanded; the partial payment for the same has been given to the
appellant, and after a few days, the deceased died otherwise than in normal circumstances within
the 7 years of her marriage with the appellant. It was found out that it was not a natural death and
she was killed for dowry, the appellant was given imprisonment for 10 years.

In case of Asha Devi, there was a demand for dowry, which the father of the deceased was not
able to fulfill, because of which the husband of the deceased along with mother in-law and father
in-law killed Asha Devi.

COMPARISION OF LAW

India: The practice of dowry is very common in India. The dowry prohibition act 1961 makes
the giving and taking of dowry void and illegal sec 498a IPC penalize the husband and his family
in case there is any cruelty on bride with 7 years of marriage.18 Even after passing this act, the
practice of dowry still takes place in some part of India.

Australia: the practice of dowry is criminalized in the laws of Australia also. Chapter 3 of the
Criminal Law of Australia deals with the practices related to dowry. The United Indian
Association (UIA) was one of the organizations advocating for the criminalization of dowry,

17
Hem Chand v State of Haryana [1994] Indlaw SC 809
18
http://wcd.nic.in/act/dowry-prohibition-act-1961
stating that the practice of dowry in modern Australia ‘is totally unacceptable and
inappropriate’.19

Kenya:Earlier, in Kenya, dowry was not prohibited, but in Kenya’s Marriage bill, which was
implemented in 2012, dowry was prohibited and any other payment related to dowry was also
prohibited.

Nepal: The practice of dowry was legal in Nepal until 2009, after which dowry was made illegal,
the act which outlawed dowry was the Social Customs and Practices Act.

Pakistan: The Pakistan Government has passed its first law to make dowry illegal in 1964, in all
the Pakistan Government has passed five separate laws which makes dowry illegal. The latest
law that makes dowry illegal in Pakistan was passes in 2008.

CRITICAL OVERVIEW OF THE JUDGEMENT

The evidences and witnesses on record clearly states that there was a demand for dowry and
because of non fulfillment of dowry demand Asha Devi was subjected to cruelty and harassment.
From the statement given by PW1,PW5 and PW2, parents and the brother of the deceased, it was
very clear that DeenDayal came to their house and since the demand for dowry was not fulfilled,
therefore, he got angry and took away Asha Devi in anger and after two months from this
incidence, Ashadevi was found death, so it can be said that it was an unnatural death and it was a
dowry death.

The ingredient of Section 304B and 498A of Indian Penal Code are fulfilled and as per the
Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, it can be assumed that it was a dowry death. No other
possible view is possible and the appellants are held guilty for committing the crime of taking
dowry, subjecting the deceased to cruelty and harassment and for the dowry death.

The Supreme Court is satisfied with the judgment given by the Trial Court and the Supreme
Court. The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.

19
http://aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_andConstitutional_Affairs/DowryAbuse/
Report/c03
 SUGGESTION

The judgment given by the Trial Court, High Court and Supreme Court were as per the laws, the
dismissal of the appeal which was filed by DeenDayal along with is son and wife was
unquestionable since the all the ingredients of all the crimes performed by them are fulfilled and
hence, rigorous imprisonment along with some fine would be sufficient punishment for all of
them.

REFERENCES

1. Indian Penal Code 1860

2. Indian Evidence Act 1872
3. Dowry Prohibition Act 1961
4. InderSain and another v State [1981] Indlaw DEL 17
5. State of Himachal Pradesh v Nikku Ram and Others [1995] Indlaw SC 1201
6. Kashmira Devi v State of Uttarakhand and others[2020] Indlaw SC 81
7. Kans Raj v State of Punjab and Others [2000] Indlaw SC 305
8. Mohammad Ishaq and Others v State of Uttar Pradesh[2020] Indlaw ALL 200
9. MonjuRoj and Others v State of West Bengal[2015] Indlaw SC 283
10. U. Suvetha v State by Inspector of Police and Another [2009] Indlaw SC 652
11. G.V. Siddaramesh v State of Karnataka[2010] Indlaw SC 83
12. Hari Om v State of Haryana and another [2014] Indlaw SC 761
13. Hem Chand v State of Haryana [1994] Indlaw SC 809

BRIEF BIO OF AUTHOR

Anumeha Jain is perusing B.B.A LLB from New Law College, Bharati Vidyapeeth University,
Pune. She is interested in mooting and MUNs, She is a good and confident speaker. She is
interested in learning new things related to the field of law. She is also interested in sports like-
badminton and table tennis.