HIRAMAL SUNDERMAL KALANTRI Vs. KESHARIMAL PREMSUKHDAS BHUTADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) QUESTION involved in this appeal is intricate and also of public importance. The facts relevant for adjudication are thus : The respondent No. 1 Kesharimal on 22-6-1988 married Usha. On 4-9-1988 Usha committed suicide. During the course of investigation vide Exh. 27, ornaments and other articles of deceased were seized. Mother of the respondent No. 1 was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Sections 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. However, she was acquitted. The learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order, rejected application under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (The Act) presented by the applicant (father of deceased Usha) for delivering him the property so seized.

(2.) ACCORDING to Mr. Bhide, the learned Counsel for the respondent, the property in question was not given under any agreement or on demand, so as to constitute a Dowry. Section 6 of the Act on which reliance is placed has, therefore, no application. Section 2 defines term "dowry" thus :-

(3.) IT is not disputed before me that the articles converted by Exh. 27 were received by deceased from her parents at the time of marriage. In view of this, the ornaments or Articles so seized would be the items of Dowry.