GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT* *Crl.A. 1735-1736/2010* Satbir Singh Vs. St. of Haryana Dated: 28.05.2021 *Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, N.V. Ramana* , partly allowed the Criminal Appeal with respect to setting aside the conviction under Section 306, IPC, whereas upheld the conviction under Section 304-B, IPC by the High Court and Trial Court in the matter of *“Dowry Death”* and further held the following

*GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT*

*Crl.A. 1735-1736/2010*
Satbir Singh Vs. St. of Haryana
Dated: 28.05.2021

*Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, N.V. Ramana* , partly allowed the Criminal Appeal with respect to setting aside the conviction under Section 306, IPC, whereas upheld the conviction under Section 304-B, IPC by the High Court and Trial Court in the matter of *“Dowry Death”* and further held the following:

i) Section 304B, IPC must be interpreted keeping in mind the legislative intent to curb the social evil of bride burning and dowry demand.
ii) A strict interpretation of Section 304B would defeat the very object for which it was enacted. The words of the provision, “soon before” does not mean “immediately before” and rather it is left to the discretion of the Courts. The same is emphasized in the findings of the Supreme Court in Khans Raj Vs. St. of Punjab [(2000) 5 SCC 207].
iii) Courts should use their discretion to determine if the period between the cruelty or harassment and the death of the victim would come within the term “soon before”. Therefore, the establishment of a “proximate and live link” between the cruelty and the consequential death of the victim is paramount to determine the same.
iv) Once the Trial Court decides that the accused is not eligible to be acquitted as per the provisions of Section 232, Cr.P.C., it must move on and fix hearings specifically for ‘defence evidence’, calling upon the accused to present his defence as per the procedure provided under Section 233, Cr.P.C.
v) If all the other ingredients of Section 304B IPC are fulfilled, any death whether caused by burns or by bodily injury or occurring otherwise than under normal circumstances shall, as per the legislative mandate, be called a “dowry death” and the woman’s husband or his relative “shall be deemed to have caused her death” unless proved otherwise.

You may also like...