NAZAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS /accused faced conviction for the offence punishable under Section 304B read with Section 34 I.P.C. First accused is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and second accused is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 7 years under Section 304B read with Section 34 I.P.C. They are also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/ - and Rs. 10,000/ -respectively. The conviction is appealed against.

(2.) THE marriage between the first appellant and deceased Soudha is not disputed. It was on 28.8.1997. Immediately after one month of the marriage, first accused, the husband of the victim, left for Gulf. Thereafter she was alone except for a few occasion with 2nd accused, her mother in law. Immediately after the marriage, both 1st accused and the victim visited her parental house. There was demand for dowry in the form of 25 cents said to be promised by PW.l, father of the victim. There was frequent demand thereafter. That 1st accused returned from Gulf after nearly about two years. There was occasion for PW.l to go to the house of accused persons in connection with the demand. He sought for time because of economic disability, as he could not meet the demand for 25 cents of land immediately. After a few days of his return, the victim committed suicide jumping into the well in the compound nearby to the residence of accused. It was in the above circumstances, charge sheet was laid against the accused, the husband and mother -in -law of the victim under Section 304B of the I.P.C.

(3.) ASSAILING the conviction, it is contended by the appellants that in order to lay a charge under Section 304B, there should have been evidence for demand of dowry and cruelty and harassment in that regard 'soon before her death'. In this case there was absolutely no evidence for demand of dowry. Really PW. 1 had promised to give 25 cents of land in the name of the victim. It was a promise without demand. He had not fulfilled the promise. Therefore, there was no demand for dowry at all, to attract the ingredients of Section 304B. The 1st accused had been in Gulf. The incident occurred a few days after he returned from Gulf. There was no evidence of any cruel behaviour on his part or even harassment demanding dowry during his short stay in India just before the incident. So nothing had taken place soon before her death in the form of cruelty demanding dowry. Moreover it is contended that admittedly PW.l the father of the victim he had come to the residence of accused 1 and 2 immediately after the arrival of 1st accused from Gulf and had settled the matter. When the issue thus stood settled, there arises no question of any harassment for dowry.