SC on Dowry Deaths

Crimes such as dowry death are generally committed in complete secrecy inside a house. The nature and amount of evidence required to establish charge cannot be of same degree as required in other cases of circumstantial evidence. The silence of inmates of the house about the cause of death would become an additional link in the chain of circumstances.
The Supreme Court made these observations while hearing an appeal filed by a person from Aurangabad challenging his conviction under Section 489-A and also the sentence of two years rigourous imprisonment.
The charge against the accused was that he had harassed his wife for dowry, which ultimately resulted in her death. The sessions court had acquitted the accused but the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court reversed the same and convicted him while allowing an appeal filed by the State of Maharashtra.
A Division Bench comprising Justices G P Mathur and R V Raveendran while dismissing the appeal observed, " The demand for dowry or money from the parents of the bride has shown a phenomenal increase in last few years.Cases are frequently coming before the Courts, where the husband or in-laws have gone to the extent of killing the bride if the demand is not met."
The Bench stated that such crimes are generally committed in complete secrecy inside the house and it becomes very difficult for the prosecution to lead evidence. No member of the family, even if he were a witness to the crime, would come forward to depose against another family member.
"The neighbours, whose evidence may be of some assistance, are generally reluctant to depose in Court as they want to keep away from others’ personal affairs and prefer not to antagonize a neighbourhood family. The parents or other members of the brides’ family being away from the scene of commission of crime are not in a position to give direct evidence that may inculpate the real accused except regarding the demand of money or dowry and harassment caused to the bride. But, it does not mean that a crime committed in secrecy or inside the four walls of a house should go unpunished," the Supreme Court also observed.
Where an offence like murder is committed in secrecy inside a house, the initial burden to establish the case would undoubtedly be upon the prosecution, but the nature and amount of evidence to be led by it to establish the charge cannot be of the same degree as is required in other cases of circumstantial evidence. The burden would be of a comparatively lighter character.