[RPC 498A] Mere Demand For Dowry Not Cruelty In Absence Of Persistent Harassment: J&K High Court

Setting aside a conviction under Sec 498-A Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed,

“Though, there was complaint by the deceased about the demand of scooter and cash being made by the appellant and his parents, there is nothing in the evidence to suggest that for not meeting the demand of dowry, the deceased was ever beaten, abused or turned out from the matrimonial home. Rather, the evidence is that she had been quietly living in her matrimonial home”

The case arose from the death of a young woman, who allegedly faced dowry demands from her husband and in-laws. Following her death, the woman's family accused the husband and his relatives of subjecting her to cruelty and harassment over dowry, leading to her untimely demise. The Principal District Judge, Bandipora, convicted the accused under Sections 498-A and 304-B RPC, holding them responsible for the victim's death due to dowry-related cruelty.

The husband and his family, however, contested the conviction, asserting that the allegations were unfounded and that the victim had not been subjected to any form of persistent harassment or cruelty.

The appellants argued that the evidence presented by the prosecution did not substantiate the claim of continuous harassment or cruelty as defined under Section 498-A RPC. The appellants further argued that the trial court had failed to consider the lack of direct evidence linking them to the alleged acts of cruelty that supposedly led to the victim's death.

Court's Observations:

After careful scrutiny of the evidence and testimonies presented, Justice Kumar observed that the essence of "cruelty" under Section 498-A RPC lies in the sustained and continuous harassment aimed at coercing the woman to meet unlawful demands. The Court emphasized that a mere demand for dowry, if not coupled with persistent harassment or cruelty, does not fulfill the legal criteria for a conviction under Section 498-A RPC.

The Court further noted discrepancies in the prosecution's case, particularly the lack of substantial evidence to prove that the victim was subjected to ongoing harassment by the appellants. The testimonies from the victim's family, while emotionally charged, did not sufficiently establish that the accused had harassed the deceased in a manner that amounted to cruelty under the law, the bench pointed.

The Court referred to several precedents to support its findings, including State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh and Girdhar Shankar Tawade v. State of Maharashtra and underscored the necessity of proving consistent harassment and cruelty beyond mere demands for dowry to sustain a conviction under Section 498-A.

In light of these considerations, the High Court concluded that the appellants' actions, though morally questionable, did not meet the stringent legal requirements for a conviction under the relevant sections of the RPC.

Case Title: Showkat Ahmad Rather Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 249

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment