The Supreme Court, on January 9, 2025, acquitted a man accused of abetment of suicide and cruelty under Sections 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The Court highlighted the importance of clear evidence to apply Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, which presumes dowry death under specific conditions.
Key Observations By The Supreme Court
The Bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, stressed the distinction between Sections 113A and 113B of the Evidence Act. While Section 113A uses the term “Shall presume” for abetment of suicide, Section 113B states “May presume,” requiring stronger evidence of harassment linked to dowry demands.
Case Background
The appellant, the deceased’s brother-in-law, faced allegations of harassment leading to the victim’s suicide. The prosecution claimed that her husband, in-laws, and the appellant harassed her for dowry, forcing her to set herself on fire.
The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The High Court upheld the conviction.
Supreme Court Verdict
The Court ruled there was “practically no evidence” to prove incessant harassment or instigation by the appellant. It emphasized that courts cannot invoke Section 113B without cogent evidence of harassment “soon before the death.” Based on this, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the earlier judgments.
