"Social evil of dowry is deeply entrenched" says Delhi HC upholding conviction of man who burnt wife to death in 1998

The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence of a man for killing his wife by burning her 28 years ago in 1998. He had challenged his conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court in 2002. An FIR was lodged in Krishna Nagar Police Station.

The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence of a man for killing his wife by burning her 28 years ago in 1998. He had challenged his conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court in 2002. An FIR in the case was lodged in Krishna Nagar Police Station. While dismissing the appeal, the High Court said, "Greed and unlawful desire for dowry are not confined to any particular economic class and unfortunately continue to plague all sections of society. The social evil of dowry is deeply entrenched."

The High Court upheld the conviction under Section 498A (Cruelty) and 302 (Murder) of the IPC. However, set aside the conviction under Section 304 B (Dowry death) IPC. The Division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja upheld the conviction and sentence of the man Sirajuddin after hearing the appeal and evidence, including the dying declaration.

The bench held, " Accordingly, upon an overall appreciation of the dying declarations given by the deceased, oral, documentary, medical and forensic evidence on record, we are satisfied that the prosecution has successfully established beyond a reasonable doubt that the deceased sustained burn injuries after the appellant poured kerosene oil upon her and set her ablaze, and that the said injuries ultimately resulted in her death. " The dying declaration recorded by the SDM is wholly trustworthy and stands corroborated by the medical evidence, MLC history, forensic evidence and surrounding circumstances. The allegeddiscrepancies highlighted by the defence are minor in nature and do not go to the root of the prosecution case," the bench said in the judgement of June 18.

The bench said that the prosecution has proved the allegations against the appellant. "Consequently, we find that prosecution has been able to prove the charges under Sections 498-A, 302 IPC against the accused. Once we hold so, separate conviction under Section 304-B IPC is notwarranted," the bench said.

The bench said that, consequently, while maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Sections 498-A/302 IPC and the sentence awarded thereunder, we set aside the conviction of the appellant under Section 304-B IPC and the sentence awarded for the said offence. The court disposed of the appeal accordingly. The bench has directed appellant Sirajuddin to surrender before the Jail Superintendent within two weeks from today to serve his remaining sentence.

His sentence was suspended during the pendency of the appeal against the judgement. The prosecution's case, as per the charge sheet, is that on 26 September 1998, at about 10.15 pm, an unknown person telephonically informed at PS Krishna Nagar that a woman had been set ablaze by pouring kerosene oil on her in Jagat Puri.

The statement of the injured Roshan was recorded by the SDM on September 27, 1998. In her statement, she had stated that she was married 3-4 years back and had two daughters. Her husband used to quarrel with her for bringing dowry and would oust her from the house after every 10-15 days and that on 26 September, 1998, at about 8.00 pm, he started beating her and asked her why she had not brought money from her parents. She stated that she was burnt because she was not able to bring money from her parents.

During treatment, Roshan expired at Safdarjung Hospital on 29th September, 1998. Section 307 IPC was replaced by Section 302 IPC. The Appellant surrendered before the Court and was arrested on 03rd October, 1998.

The Trial Court had convicted the accused under Section 302, 304-B, 498-A IPC, holding that the prosecution was able to bring home the guilt of the accused and proved the same beyond a reasonable doubt. On April 24, 2002, the appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC with a fine of Rs.10,000.

He was sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence under Section 304-B IPC with a fine of Rs.5,000. He was further sentenced to suffer three years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000. The sentence awarded to the appellant was suspended by the High Court on September 12, 2005.

The appellant challenged the conviction primarily on the ground that the prosecution's case rests solely upon three alleged dying declarations which, according to him, are materially inconsistent, suspicious and thus incapable of forming the sole basis of conviction. The High Court rejected the arguements that no person would demand expensive articles or substantial sums of money from a poor family.

The High Court said that greed and unlawful desire for dowry are not confined to any particular economic class and, unfortunately, continue to plague all sections of society. The social evil of dowry is deeply entrenched and often manifests in demands that are wholly disproportionate to the financial condition of the bride's family. " The fact that the family of the deceased was poor, which does not make the allegations improbable, rather, it lends credence to the prosecution's case that the deceased was subjected to sustained pressure and harassment because the demands raised by the Appellant could not be fulfilled," the High Court said. (ANI)