Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8 apeal552.07.odt Learned Counsel has submitted that there is material omission in respect of demand of dowry.

11. Learned Counsel has submitted that prosecution has failed to prove that accused persons were demanding dowry and on that count, they were ill-treating the deceased. Learned Counsel has submitted that material ingredients of Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code are not proved by the prosecution. Therefore, appellant/accused are wrongly convicted by the trial Court.

9 apeal552.07.odt

14. At last, the learned Counsel has submitted that there is no evidence to show that the appellants/accused ill-treated the deceased on account of demand of dowry and therefore, the deceased has committed suicide. Learned trial Court has wrongly convicted all the appellants for the offences punishable under Section 304-B and 498-A of I.P.C. Hence, the impugned Judgment is liable to be quashed and set aside.

38. All the above discussion clearly shows that prosecution has failed to prove the material ingredients of Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code that deceased Sarika was ill-treated and subjected to cruelty by accused persons on account of demand of dowry. Therefore, it is clear that accused are wrongly convicted by trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There is no evidence by the side of prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.