Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

A division bench of the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad, comprising Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice SG Chapangoankar, recently held that in order to establish an offence under Section 498A, there must be either an illegal demand or the woman should be driven to commit suicide.

“In order to bring offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code there has to be illegal demand or woman should be driven to commit suicide by acts of cruelty,” the court held.

The high court was hearing an appeal filed by the husband against the Sessions Court's order, convicting him under Section 302 and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

According to the wife's allegations, the husband used to verbally abuse her and question her character in filthy language. She further claimed that he suspected her of having an illicit relationship with another man.

On one occasion, the husband allegedly poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. In an attempt to extinguish the fire, the mother-in-law also suffered injuries. The wife and the mother-in-law were rushed to the hospital by the father-in-law, but unfortunately, the wife succumbed to her burn injuries.

The appellant argued that the quarrels arose because the deceased behaved arrogantly with his parents and himself due to his alcohol addiction. According to the mother of the accused, the deceased came running in a burning condition from inside the house while she was sitting on the platform outside with her grandson. The deceased allegedly set herself on fire in a fit of anger. The court was also informed about discrepancies in the two dying declarations.

The Additional Public Prosecutor countered that a person on their deathbed would not lie, and it was evident from the records that a dispute between the deceased and the appellant had occurred in the past as well. He further asserted that a well-reasoned judgment should not be disturbed based on defence arguments.

The high court agreed with the appellant's contentions, noting that the trial judge did not consider the evidence in the proper perspective.

“The appellant has examined himself as DW-1 and explained the circumstance in which his wife had sustained the burn injuries. It can be seen that the learned trial Judge has not considered the said evidence in proper perspective. Testimony of the appellant was supported by DW-2 Gokul and DW-3 Govind,” the bench noted.

Therefore, the division bench then acquitted the appellant and said that by no stretch of imagination the ingredients of Section 498A were fulfilled.

“In this case the prosecution had not come with the case that Nitabai has committed suicide. It was rather case of the accused that she has committed suicide. By no stretch of imagination the facts disclose and prove the ingredients of Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code,” the court observed.

Case title: Santosh Rathod vs State of Maharashtra