SCC Online Web Edition, © 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd.

Page 1 Saturday, April 30, 2022

Printed For: Palak Jain, Asian Law College
SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com
© 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Penal Code, 1860

— S. 304-B — Dowry death — Marriage between the parties (i.e. between the victim and accused)
— Established — Suicide — Whether a dowry death — Role of the parents of the accused husband —
Parents practically had no occasion to inflict torture on the victim — Torture or cruelty or harassment
perpetrated by the accused husband — Dowry death established — Acquittal order in respect of
accused father-in-law — Conviction in respect of accused husband — Upheld — Period of
imprisonment — Reduced — Evidence Act, 1872 — S. 113-B
So from the materials on record it is sufficiently clear that the marriage between appellant with deceased has
been established. It is also to be mentioned that before or after the marriage the parents of appellant practically
had no occasion to inflict torture on deceased for money. On the other hand, it is sufficiently clear from the
materials on record that the claim of money, if any, was made by the appellant since he was an unemployed
youth and he was using deceased to extort money from her parents. So after due consideration we come to the
conclusion that the torture or cruelty or harassment perpetrated on deceased was by her husband and
practically within seven years of her marriage she died after taking poison. So it is sufficiently established that
before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband in connection with demand for
dowry and accordingly the conclusion is that death was undoubtedly a dowry death within the definition of S.
304-B IPC. In the circumstances, the trial court rightly found the appellant guilty under S. 304-B IPC.

Pradip Kumar Adak v. State of W.B.,

2004 SCC OnLine Cal 369 : (2004) 3 CHN 656

Bench Strength 2. Coram : G.C. De and Sankar Prosad Mitra, J.

[Date of decision : 28/06/2004]
Disclaimer: While every effort is made to avoid any mistake or omission, this casenote/ headnote/ judgment/ act/ rule/ regulation/ circular/
notification is being circulated on the condition and understanding that the publisher would not be liable in any manner by reason of any mistake
or omission or for any action taken or omitted to be taken or advice rendered or accepted on the basis of this casenote/ headnote/ judgment/ act/
rule/ regulation/ circular/ notification. All disputes will be subject exclusively to jurisdiction of courts, tribunals and forums at Lucknow only. The
authenticity of this text must be verified from the original source.