A court ruled that in dowry death cases, the focus should be on the marriage and its circumstances, not the place where the woman died. The husband had argued that no dowry offence was made out since his wife died at her parental home. The court rejected this claim, stating that the location of the suicide does not diminish the seriousness of the allegations. The judgment reinforces that the nature of the marital relationship is central in such cases.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court ruled that the location whether parental or matrimonial where a married woman is driven to take her own life is irrelevant in a dowry death case, leading to the denial of bail for a man accused in the matter.
Justice Girish Kathpalia stated that, for a meaningful interpretation of Section 304B (dowry death) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the focus should be on the existence and continuity of the marriage rather than the place where the woman resided before her suicide.
Also Read: Family Opposed Love Marriage || UP Man Kills Wife, Attempts Suicide
The court noted in its April 7 judgment,
“The place where a tormented lady gets compelled to kill herself has no bearing. For a purposive interpretation of the provision under Section 304B IPC, it is the existence and continuance of matrimony which has to be kept in mind and not the place(s) to which the deceased shifts herself before taking her life,”
As a result, bail was denied to the man, who faced charges in the dowry death case filed by his in-laws following his wife’s suicide. He argued that the charge was not applicable since she died at her parental home rather than her matrimonial residence.
Additionally, he contended that no allegations of dowry harassment were made when she moved back to her parental home.
The court dismissed this argument, stating,
“I am unable to convince myself that merely because the deceased died by suicide in her parental home and not in her matrimonial home, it is not a case of dowry death.”
According to the prosecution, the couple married on February 22, 2023, and shortly after, the man and his family began harassing the woman for dowry.
Also Read: “Marriage” Between Minors Declared “Void”: Allahbad High Court
The woman returned to her parental home a few days after the marriage but remained in contact with her estranged husband through phone calls. Their last conversation occurred on April 23, 2023, and she died by suicide on April 27, 2023.
The court found it “unable to accept the contention from the man’s counsel that the dowry death charge was invalid due to the absence of harassment allegations immediately before the woman’s death.”
It clarified,
“However, I must cautiously reiterate the rider that the above analysis is only for examining the bail plea of the accused/applicant, so shall have no bearing on the ultimate appreciation of evidence by the trial court,”
The court further explained that the term “soon before her death,” as used in Section 304B IPC, should be interpreted with regard to the intent and purpose of the law. It should be understood as indicating a continuity of time rather than merely a measure of time.
The order emphasized that numerous judicial precedents from the Supreme Court and various high courts affirm that “soon before” is a relative term, which must be evaluated within the specific context of each case, and no rigid time frame can be established.