Marriage To Be Seen, Not Place Where Woman Kills Self In Dowry Cases: Court

The Delhi High Court has held the place -- parental or matrimonial -- where a married woman is driven to kill herself had no bearing in a dowry death case and refused bail to a man.

Justice Girish Kathpalia said for a purposive interpretation of the provision of Section 304B (dowry death) of IPC, the existence and continuance of matrimony had to be kept in mind and not the place where the woman moved to before killing herself.

"Place where a tormented lady gets compelled to kill herself has no bearing. For a purposive interpretation of the provision under Section 304B IPC, it is the existence and continuance of matrimony which has to be kept in mind and not the place(s) to which the deceased shifts herself before taking her life," the court said in an April 7 judgement.

The court, therefore, denied bail to a man, facing prosecution in the dowry death case against him on the complaint of his in-laws after his wife died by suicide.

He claimed the offence of dowry death was not made out as his wife died at her parental and not the matrimonial home.

The man also argued no allegation of dowry harassment was levelled when she moved to her parental home and died by suicide.

Rejecting the submission, the court said, "I am unable to convince myself that merely because the deceased died by suicide in her parental home and not in her matrimonial home, it is not a case of dowry death." According to the prosecution, the couple married on February 22, 2023, and since then the man and his family members began to harass the woman over dowry.

A few days into the marriage, the woman returned to her parental home and remained in touch with the estranged husband over phone calls, it added.

While their last call was on April 23, 2023, she died by suicide on April 27, 2023, the prosecution said.

The court was "unable to accept the contention" of the man's counsel that the offence of dowry death would not be made out as there was no harassment alleged right before the woman died.

"However, I must cautiously reiterate the rider that the above analysis is only for examining the bail plea of the accused/applicant, so shall have no bearing on the ultimate appreciation of evidence by the trial court," it said.

The court further said the expression "soon before her death", as used in Section 304B IPC has to be construed keeping in mind the scope and purpose behind the enactment.

It has to be read as an expression of continuity of time and not an expression of mere length of time, it added.

The order said a plethora of judicial pronouncements of the Supreme Court and different high courts reiterate the expression "soon before" is a relative term, ought to be considered under specific factual matrix of the case in hand and no straitjacket formula could be laid down fixing any time limit. 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)