GOPAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Citation: [2009] 2 S.C.R. 423

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT, MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA

Case summary

GOPAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN.pdf

Judgment text

[2009] 2 S. C. R. 423 GOPAL V. STATE OFRAJASTHAN Criminal Appeal No. 57 of 2002 FEBRUARY 13, 2009 (DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ. ) . If' Penal Code, 1860· : . ss. 498A, 306 and 323 - Applicability of - Death of wife due to asphyxia, 22 years after marriage - FIR against husband u/ss. 498A and 306 - Acquittal by trial court - However, High Court convicting uls. s. 498 A - On appeal, held: There was no evidence of demand of dowry and case of suicide was not established - Thus, s. 498A(b) ands. 306 not applicable - _.... , Since, husband has been in custody for 6 months, his conviction uls. 323 not considered - Conviction uls. 498A set aside. Prosecution case was that wife died 22 years afte,r the marriage. The cause of death was asphyxia, due to opium poisoning and there were 6 bruises on the body. FIR was registered against the appellant-husband u/ ss. 498A & 306 IPC for beating his wife and treating her ~ with c'ruelty.

Trial court acquitted the appellant as prosecution case was not proved. High Court upheld acquittal u/s. 306 but convicted u/s. 498A. Hence the present appeal. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: Section 498A IPC has two limbs. The first limb of s. 498A provides that whoever, being the husband or \. the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such ... ,.. ' .... subjecting her to cruelty- Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation - For the purpose of this section 'cruelty' means - ..

(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable ~ security or is on account of failure by her or any person ... related to her to meet such demand. " 7. Consequences of cruelty which are likely to drive a woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health, whether mental or physical of the woman are required to be established in order to bring home the application . ,+.. , j-of Section 498A IPC. Cruelty has been defined in the ~ Explanation for the purpose of Section 498A.

Substantive Section 498A IPC and presumptive Section 1138 of the Evidence Act have been inserted in the respective statutes by Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983. It is to be noted that Sections 3048 and 498A, IPC cannot be held to be mutually inclusive. These provisions deal with two distinct offences. It is true that cruelty is a common essential to both the Sections and >. ;that has to be proved. The Explanation to Section 498A gives l( the meaning of 'cruelty'. In Section 3048 there is no such explanation about the meaning of 'cruelty'. Ben having regard to common background . to these offences it has to be taken that the meaning of 'cruelty' or 'harassment' is the same as prescribed in the Explanation to Section 498A under which . 'cruelty' by itself amounts to an offence. Under Section 3048 it is 'dowry death' that is punishable and such death should have >.. ( occurred within seven years of marriage. No such period is A. mentionec'. i in Section 498A.

A person charged and acquitted ' under Section 3048 can be convicted under Section 498A without that charge being there, if such a case is made out. If the case is established, there can be a conviction under both the sections. (See Akula Ravinder and others v. The State of Andhra Pradesh (AIR 1991 SC 1142). Section 498A IPC and Section 1138 of the Evidence Act include in their amplitude past events of cruelty. Period of operation of Section 1138 of the .. _. \. Evidence Act is seven years, presumption arises when a woman committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of marriage. 8. The above position was highlighted in 8alwant Singh & Ors. v. State of H. P. [2008(10) JT 589]. 9. Section 498A IPC has two limbs. The first limb of Section 498A provides that whoever, being the husband or the relative ;.. , of the husband of a woman, subject~ such woman to cruelty • shall be punished.

'Cruelty' has been defined in clause (a) of the Explanation to the said Section as any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive to a woman to commit suicide. When there is demand of dowry, the case comes under [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT J. ] .... clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 498A. Clause (a) of the Explanation has definite application to the facts of the present case. Additionally, effect of Section 113 A of the Indian Evidence Act cannot be lost sight of. 10. Further as per Section 113 A of the Evidence Act when 8 the question as to whether commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband ,_ and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period > of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the court may presume that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband.

This has not been rebutted by the appellants. 11. For bringing in application of Section 306 IPC, suicide has to be established. In the instant case, the trial Court and the 0 t High Court have categorically held that no suicide has been established. 12. So far as Section 498-A(b) is concerned, there must be an evidence of demand of dowry. There is no evidence in that regard adduced by the prosecution. That being so, as rightly contended by learned counsel for the appellant Section 498- A(b) has no application. 13. The crucial question is whether the appellant can be convicted in terms of Section 323 IPC. Even if it is so as contended by learned counsel for the respondent, considering the fact that the appellant has already suffered custody of about 6 months, we do not consider it necessary to go into that question. The appeal is allowed. The conviction as recorded is set aside. The bail bonds executed by the appellant for release on bail pursuant to the order dated 14. 1.

2002 shall stand ... -. discharged. N. J. Appeal allowed.