CRUX:
Sachin Ramchandra Teke vs The State of Maharashtra – The Husband and his family members cannot be held for murder because of the fact that the wife committed suicide in the matrimonial house within two months of marriage.
DATE OF JUDGEMENT:
Pronounced on 6th of April 2021.
CORUM:
Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav & N.R. Borkar, JJ.
PARTIES:
Sachin Ramchandra Teke (Appellant)
The State of Maharashtra (Respondent)
ISSUE
Whether the husband and his family are responsible for death of wife who committed suicide in her matrimonial house within 2 months of marriage.
SUMMARY
The Court acquits husband and his family in a case where wife committed suicide within 2 months of marriage.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
- Section 498A, 302, 304, and section 34 of the IPC
- Section 3 and 4 of the dowry prohibition Act
- Section 113 B of the Indian Evidence Act
OVERVIEW
• In this case, the Bombay High Court acquitted a husband and his family members in a case where the wife committed suicide within a period of two months of their marriage. The court in this case held that just because of the fact that the wife died and the matrimonial house within such a short period of 2 months, the entire family of the husband cannot be stigmatised as to having committed offences so serious and heinous as offence under Section 302 of Indian penal code (punishment for Murder).
• A two-judge bench comprising of justice NR Borkar and Justice SS Jadhav set aside a judgement of a sessions court judge delivered on 29th June 2012 in which the husband and his family members were convicted for offences punishable under Section 498A, 302, 304 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
• The High Court observed that this was a result of Megha’s parents hurrying up the marriage as they believed that they have found a suitable match for their daughter and even against her wishes of continuing her education. The court also observed that the suicide was committed in a "state of stress".
• Sachin (husband) and Megha (the deceased wife) got married on 28th July 2020 and while living in a joint family.
• In September 2020, two months after the marriage, Megha was discovered inside her bedroom, hanging dead. As a result, Megha's father filed a complaint at the Police Station alleging that Megha complained to him that she was subjected to ill-treatment and harassment for not getting and gold ring for the husband and she was also subjected to starvation by her in laws and husband.
• Around 9 witnesses were examined by the Prosecution and the Defence also examined four witnesses.
ARGUMENTS BY THE PARTIES
• The Appellants contended that there was cogent and convincing evidence proving that there was known dispute between the members of both the families over any case of dowry or ornaments. They also contended that the fact that Megha committed suicide within two months of the marriage shows that this marriage was against her will.
• The Prosecution however contended that Megha had died in her matrimonial home due to mental depression which led to her suicide and it was ought to have been known to the accused persons as they were living under the same roof. It was also submitted by the council that Megha’s complaint to her father and brother also proves that she was ill treated for not respecting the husband's family will at the time of marriage ceremony and not fulfilling the demand of giving them the golden ring.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
1. The Court after examining all the facts of the case and after listening to all the witnesses and the Council observed that the medical evidence beyond and any reasonable doubt prove that the cause of Megha's death was "asphyxia" which was caused due to hanging and therefore convection under Section 302 (punishment for Murder) of IPC was unwarranted. The Court also noted the statement given by the neurologist who was treating Megha that she was under mental stress since 2005 and was a girl with a very sensitive nature.
2. As a result, the court held that no connection can be made out under Section 498A of IPC. And the fact that the wife had died in the matrimonial house within two months of the marriage cannot be the reason for the entire family to be stigmatized as having committed search serious offences under Section 302 of IPC. There was a clear absence of legally admissible evidence and the conviction cannot be on the moral grounds.
3. Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act was not attracted in this case and the Court also held that it is a rebuttable presumption and do not absolve the prosecution from proving the case beyond all reasonable doubts.
4. The Court further held that the surrounding circumstance in this case also needs to be taken into consideration. In the present case it cannot be said that Megha had died in suspicious or questionable circumstances. And the Prosecution has not proven any ill treatment by the husband or his family in that two months period. As a result, the offence under Section 3 and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act cannot be attracted in the present case.
5. The Court also referred to a similar judgement which was passed by a Delhi District Court (Tis Hazari Court) earlier this month in which, the court acquitted the husband and his family members in a case where the wife committed suicide within a month of marriage. Serious offences of Cruelty, Dowry Death, and Abatement of Suicide were struck down against the husband and his family. In that case the Court held that, "normal wear and tear in the family in an initial period of marriage cannot amount to the fact that the woman was tortured to an extend that she was compelled to take her own life." This was held in the case of State vs Vijay
6. Ultimately the Court also observed that if a wife comment suicide in unnatural or questionable circumstance within a short period of time (few days or months of marriage) the law raises presumption against husband's family, butdoesn’t it also show hypersensitivity of a wife who did not give time to the pious relationship.
CONCLUSION
The present case was brought forward when the husband and his family members appealed before the High Court praying to reverse a previous order given by the Sessions Court in a case where the wife committed suicide within two months of marriage. The husband and his family were charged with offences under section 498A, 302, 304, read with section 34 of the IPC and section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibitions Act.
The Court held that there was not enough admissible evidence against the accused to prove any ill treatment or cruelty and the mere fact that the wife was found hanging in the matrimonial house after 2 months of marriage is not enough for a conviction under the abovementioned sections. As a result, the court acquitted the husband and his family members.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
