Interpret legislation to curb menace; be cautious: SC to courts on dowry dying circumstances

Stating that the “menace of dowry death is increasing day by day”, the Supreme Court Friday referred to as upon courts to interpret the legislation on the subject conserving in thoughts the legislative intent to curb the “social evil of bride burning and dowry demand” whereas additionally being cautious towards makes an attempt to rope in relations of the accused husband, although they could don’t have any energetic function within the fee of the offence and could also be residing at distant locations.
Tracing the historical past of the Dowry Prohibition Act and amendments to it, significantly the 1096 amendments by which Section 304B was particularly launched within the IPC, as a stringent provision to curb the menace of dowry dying within the nation, a bench of Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justice Aniruddha Bose stated “considering the significance of such a legislation, a strict interpretation would defeat the very object for which it was enacted”.
Section 304B (1) defines ‘dowry death’ because the dying of a girl brought on by burning or bodily accidents or happens in any other case than beneath regular circumstances, inside seven years of marriage, and it’s proven that quickly earlier than her dying, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband, in reference to demand for dowry.
The court docket was listening to an attraction towards an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court upholding the conviction and sentencing of a person within the case of dying of his spouse within the thirteenth month of their marriage. The accused took the defence that prosecution had didn’t show there was any demand for dowry and even when assuming there was such a requirement, the state had not proved that it was made “soon before” or proximate to the dying of the lady.
Writing for the bench, CJI Ramana stated that although usually the part is to be interpreted strictly provided that it’s a legal statute, nevertheless, “where strict interpretation leads to absurdity or goes against the spirit of legislation, the courts may, in appropriate cases, place reliance upon the genuine import of the words, taken in their usual sense to resolve such ambiguities”.
The bench stated that “there is no denying that such social evil is persisting even today. A study titled “Global study on Homicide: Gender-related killing of women and girls”, printed by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, highlighted that in 2018 feminine dowry deaths account for 40-50 p.c of all feminine homicides recorded yearly in India. The dismal fact is that from the interval 1999 to 2016, these figures have remained fixed. In truth, the most recent knowledge furnished by the National Crime Records Bureau signifies that in 2019 itself, 7115 circumstances had been registered beneath Section 304-B, IPC alone”.
Given the state of affairs, it’s “therefore…safe to deduce that when the legislature used the words, ‘soon before’ they did not mean ‘immediately before’. Rather, they left its determination in the hands of the courts. The factum of cruelty or harassment differs from case to case. Even the spectrum of cruelty is quite varied…No straitjacket formulae can therefore be laid down by this Court to define what exact the phrase ‘soon before’ entails”.
“Therefore, Courts should use their discretion to determine if the period between the cruelty or harassment and the death of the victim would come within the term ‘soon before’. What is pivotal to the above determination, is the establishment of a ‘proximate and live link’ between the cruelty and the consequential death of the victim”, the bench added.
It additionally stated that the part “does not take a pigeonhole approach in categorizing death as homicidal or suicidal or accidental, as was done earlier. The reason…is due to the fact that death occurring “otherwise than under normal circumstances” can, in circumstances, be homicidal or suicidal or unintended. However, the Section 304-B, IPC endeavours to additionally handle these conditions whereby murders or suicide are masqueraded as accidents”.
Warning towards misuse of the legislation, the apex court docket additionally stated that “undoubtedly…the menace of dowry death is increasing day by day. However, it is also observed that sometimes family members of the husband are roped in, even though they have no active role in commission of the offence and are residing at distant places. In these cases, the Court need to be cautious in its approach”.
The SC whereas upholding his conviction and sentence beneath 304-B nevertheless acquitted him of the cost of abetting her suicide saying the prosecution had failed to ascertain that the dying had occurred on account of suicide.