Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance

Accused of dowry death Cases must be dealt with iron hand: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court stated in a recent decision (Ajhola Devi and Others v. State of Jharkhand) that the introduction of Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was intended to lessen the possibility of dowry death.

The community must be made aware, a division bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna held, that anyone found guilty of the crime of dowry death will face severe punishment.

"According to Section 304B, the dowry killing offence is a crime against society. The public must receive a clear message that anyone found guilty of dowry death or other offences listed in the Dowry Prohibition Act will face severe punishment "the Court declared.

The court upheld the Jharkhand High Court's judgement to dole down a 10-year solitary confinement sentence to the deceased woman's mother- and father-in-law.

The appellant-accused had petitioned the supreme court, claiming that a lighter sentence might be given to them due to their advanced age.

The court took note of the fact that the deceased woman had gone away less than a year after getting married, and the prosecution had shown and demonstrated that she had requested dowry.

"The false case or theory put forth by the accused that the deceased died as a result of diarrhoea by the defence has not been substantiated or confirmed. Seven years in prison is the minimum penalty for dowry death, and life in prison is the maximum. The offender was given a 10-year sentence of solitary incarceration by the trial court "The Court said.

Additionally, it was claimed that the inclusion of Section 304B was done with the intention of taking a strong stance against the possibility of dowry death "When handling circumstances under Section 304B, this legislative objective must be taken into account. According to Section 304B, the dowry death offence constitutes a crime against society. Such crimes have a serious detrimental impact on society "the outlined sequence.

The Court came to the conclusion that a 10-year sentence was not excessive in light of the offence committed based on the facts and circumstances of the case.

It thus rejected the appeal.

Ajhola Devi and Another

vs

State of Jharkhand

Download Judgment

[gview file="http://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Ajhola_Devi_and_Another_v__State_of_Jharkhand.pdf"]

Latest Legal News