Supreme Court in the case of Sandeep Kumar and others versus State of Uttrakhand and others , overturned the decision of High court of Uttrakhand by setting aside the conviction and life sentence of the accused husband, her father-in-law, and her mother-in –law under section 304A Indian Penal Code, 1860 stating that the deceased wife did not die an unnatural death.
Facts of the case:
The daughter of the complainant Priyanka (deceased) and Sandeep Kumar tied the knot of marriage on 10-12-2009. According to deceased’s father after some time of marriage, Sandeep Kumar and his family started harassing his daughter(Priyanka).One month before the fateful incident Priyanka and her husband came to her father asking for 10 lakh rupees. The parents of the deceased convinced her and sent her back to her matrimonial house with her husband. On 23-10-2011 the father of the complainant received a call from her daughter requesting her father to come to her matrimonial home as she had the fear of being killed by her husband and in-laws, and when the parents reached there they found the dead body of their daughter in the car which was given by the father on her marriage. The family of the deceased contented that the death was caused by the poison which was given to her by her Sandeep Kumar and his family.
Decision given by the Session Court
The Session Court acquitted Sandeep Kumar and his father and mother as the complainant counsel failed to prove that the cause of action/death was dowry death, there being no evidence found that the reason of death was poison. The doctors suggested that the death of the deceased is not the result of poison but the disease of tuberculosis as there were evidences that she was undergoing the treatment of tuberculosis and she might have succumbed to it. It was also proved that there were no traces of poison and no one in the accused family had possession of poison.
Decision of High Court
The high court reversed the decision of the lower court by awarding the accused conviction of life sentence and totally neglected the autopsy of the deceased that shows that the deceased was the patient of tuberculosis and was taking treatment for the same and held accused and his family members guilty of dowry death sentencing them life imprisonment.
Decision of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court set aside the decision of High Court on the ground that if the cause of death could not been established as an unnatural the same cannot be treated as offence of dowry death under section 304B of the IPC, 1860 and that the ingredients of dowry death were not established in the present case. It was held that it has to be shown that the deceased wife was subjected to cruelty or harassment before the death in connection to dowry and in the present case the allegation made by the father of deceased were not proven hence the accused were acquitted on the grounds that there were no traces of poison and the accused were not in the possession of poison. Further the Apex court held that since the deceased was already suffering from some medical conditions it was possible that she surrendered to them and added that the prosecution failed to establish that the wife died due to unnatural causes which were one of the essential ingredients to prove dowry death.