Criminal Revision Application No. 310 of 2005 · Bombay High Court · 2005

Rule. The learned A.P.P. waives service. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taken up for hearing forthwith.

The prayer in this petition is for setting framing charge passed learned Sessions Judge, Mumbai. The charge framed Code. sections 498A, 306 304-B Indian Penal With a appreciate submissions the Counsel appearing for the parties, it will be necessary to refer to the facts of the case in brief.

The first informant is the mother of the deceased. The deceased married Applicant. According informant, Applicant a friend marriage 2 : ::: 2 : 2 : arranged between deceased Applicant. The marriage performed 22nd March

2000. According

informant, family Punjab family Applicant a Maharashtrian family. According informant, disputes between deceased Applicant regarding tradition followed family deceased. According informant, religious nature Applicant, provide pleasures According matrimonial deceased. her, Applicant torture deceased. According a dispute between deceased Applicant. On 23rd September 2000, the deceased committed suicide by jumping from the balcony of her matrimonial home.

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted absolutely material framing charge sections Indian Penal Code ingredients offences out. He submitted prosecution Applicant assaulted deceased. He pointed demand dowry. He submitted ingredients section 306 totally absent. learned A.P.P. State pointed charge framed against Applicant therefore, interference permissible. Lastly The a 3 : ::: 3 : 3 : pointed perusing statements recorded during investigation, a commission offences sections 498A, 306 340-B of the IPC made out and therefore, the charge has been rightly framed.

With the assistance of the learned Counsel appearing parties, I through statements witnesses produced charge sheet. The informant-mother deposed dispute between deceased Applicant because different family background deceased Applicant. The informant stated Applicant religious nature, provide pleasures matrimonial deceased. The informant deceased committed suicide, afternoon, visited parent’s complained ill-treatment Applicant. According informant, suggested deceased Applicant. However, deceased refused stated desire else. According informant, deceased suffering therefore, advised deceased a Doctor. According informant, deceased called informed 4 : ::: 4 : 4 : that she visited the dispensary of Doctor and that she was alright by that time.

The second statement is of the father of the deceased version identical version informant. The statement Sunil Umanath a resident building deceased residing marriage. The statement prosecution. There statement Karuna Sharma who a deceased. She stated different family background Applicant deceased, disputes between them. She stated deceased informed Applicant a position provide pleasures matrimonial deceased. The statement Meena Ashok Ghai relationship between Applicant deceased. Same statement of Manu Devendra Sharma. statement mother Applicant recorded. She stated dispute between deceased. She stated dispute between Applicant deceased incident. On The a contrary stated evening Applicant deceased a Doctor. The statement Doctor Mahesh Pandya treated deceased day, discloses deceased accompanied 5 : ::: 5 : 5 : Applicant clinic, chitchating other. He stated notice tension between Applicant deceased. The statement Sanjog Prakash Vaidya i.e. deceased disclosed husband Applicant causing mental harassment Applicant repeatedly stating wedlock. witness Neelima Rajesh Jonsa stated Applicant ill-treating deceased assaulted deceased. She stated mother-in-law deceased banged The wall. Another witness Aeriel Jhuda Ebrahim stated the deceased had informed her that the Applicant was assaulting her.

A perusal of the statements shows that none of witnesses stated demand Applicant or his family members in cash or in kind of dowry. Section 304-B of the IPC reads thus: 304-B. Dowry death. - (1) Where caused bodily injury a occurs otherwise normal circumstances within marriage before subjected cruelty harassment husband relative husband for, 6 : ::: 6 : 6 : connection with, demand dowry, called "dowry death", husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. . Explanation.- For purposes sub-section, "dowry" meaning as in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961). . (2) Whoever commits punished imprisonment a not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life. " Neither informant witnesses alleged demand either Applicant any member family, therefore, section 304-B IPC apply. In initially prosecution section 304-B IPC. So section 498 Indian Penal Code concerned, number witnesses stated Applicant subjected deceased cruelty. So section 306 concerned, I statements witnesses, material charge against Applicant offence. The Revision Application partly succeeds. Since material 7 : ::: 7 : 7 : whatsoever charge section 304B Indian Penal Code, the order dated 12th September 2005 is modified to that extent.

According I pass the following order: (i) The Revision application partly succeeds. charge framed section 304-B The IPC quashed aside. The charges framed under the other sections viz. section 498(A) and section 306 are maintained. (ii) At stage, learned Counsel Applicant stayed a reasonable enable Applicant to approach the higher Court. The prayer for stay is rejected. Judge. Judge. Judge.