ADVOCATEMMMOHAN: Effect of Acquittal under Section 302 IPC — Sustainability of Conviction under Section 304-B IPC. (Paras 11, 19–20) Trial Court acquitted accused under Section 302 IPC but convicted under Section 304-B IPC. State did not appeal against acquittal under Section 302 IPC. High Court held that acquittal for murder does not ipso facto invalidate conviction for dowry death when statutory ingredients under Section 304-B IPC stand independently proved. Ratio Decidendi: Conviction under Section 304-B IPC is sustainable even if charge under Section 302 IPC fails, provided statutory requirements of dowry death are independently established. Rebuttal of Presumption — Failure of Defence. (Paras 28–29) After presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act arose, accused neither elicited material contradictions in cross-examination nor adduced defence evidence. Ratio Decidendi: In absence of rebuttal evidence or material elicited in cross-examination to displace statutory presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act, conviction under Section 304-B IPC must follow.

Saturday, February 28, 2026

Effect of Acquittal under Section 302 IPC — Sustainability of Conviction under Section 304-B IPC. (Paras 11, 19–20) Trial Court acquitted accused under Section 302 IPC but convicted under Section 304-B IPC. State did not appeal against acquittal under Section 302 IPC. High Court held that acquittal for murder does not ipso facto invalidate conviction for dowry death when statutory ingredients under Section 304-B IPC stand independently proved. Ratio Decidendi: Conviction under Section 304-B IPC is sustainable even if charge under Section 302 IPC fails, provided statutory requirements of dowry death are independently established. Rebuttal of Presumption — Failure of Defence. (Paras 28–29) After presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act arose, accused neither elicited material contradictions in cross-examination nor adduced defence evidence. Ratio Decidendi: In absence of rebuttal evidence or material elicited in cross-examination to displace statutory presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act, conviction under Section 304-B IPC must follow.

advocatemmmohan

Dowry Death — Ingredients of Section 304-B IPC — Proof of Harassment “Soon Before Death” — Presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act. (Paras 21–29)

To sustain conviction under Section 304-B IPC, prosecution must establish that the deceased died otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of marriage and that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with dowry demand.

In the present case, marriage was on 17.05.2017 and death occurred within seven years. Medical evidence (Ex.P.9 and testimony of P.W.14) established homicidal death due to strangulation associated with head injury. Evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 (father and sister), corroborated by P.Ws.3, 5–9 (landlord, neighbours, mediators), proved continuous harassment for additional dowry at Vella Village and later at Ramachandrapuram.

The Court found proximity between harassment and death, holding existence of a live link.

Ratio Decidendi: Once prosecution establishes unnatural death within seven years of marriage coupled with credible evidence of dowry-related harassment soon before death, presumption under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act arises, shifting burden to accused to rebut the same.

Appreciation of Evidence — Interested Witnesses — Requirement of Corroboration. (Paras 24–27)

Father and sister of deceased were examined. Defence contended they were interested witnesses requiring corroboration. Court held their testimony was corroborated by independent witnesses including landlord, neighbours and mediators.

No material contradictions or impeachment under Section 155 Evidence Act were shown. Their evidence remained unimpeached.

Ratio Decidendi: Testimony of close relatives of deceased in dowry death cases cannot be discarded merely on ground of relationship when corroborated by independent witnesses and when credit remains unimpeached.

Effect of Acquittal under Section 302 IPC — Sustainability of Conviction under Section 304-B IPC. (Paras 11, 19–20)

Trial Court acquitted accused under Section 302 IPC but convicted under Section 304-B IPC. State did not appeal against acquittal under Section 302 IPC.

High Court held that acquittal for murder does not ipso facto invalidate conviction for dowry death when statutory ingredients under Section 304-B IPC stand independently proved.

Ratio Decidendi: Conviction under Section 304-B IPC is sustainable even if charge under Section 302 IPC fails, provided statutory requirements of dowry death are independently established.

Rebuttal of Presumption — Failure of Defence. (Paras 28–29)

After presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act arose, accused neither elicited material contradictions in cross-examination nor adduced defence evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: In absence of rebuttal evidence or material elicited in cross-examination to displace statutory presumption under Section 113-B Evidence Act, conviction under Section 304-B IPC must follow.

Sentence — No Interference. (Para 30)

Sentence of ten years’ simple imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC and respective sentences under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act were affirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where conviction is based on cogent evidence and statutory presumption stands unrebutted, sentence prescribed within statutory limits does not warrant appellate interference.

Final Order

Criminal Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence in S.C. No.226 of 2019 dated 18.02.2020 affirmed. Interlocutory applications closed. Judgment directed to be certified to lower Court under Section 405 Cr.P.C.

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN