Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Allahabad High Court Acquits Accused in Dowry Death Case Citing "Insufficient Evidence and Benefit of Doubt"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant verdict that has garnered widespread attention, the High Court delivered a landmark judgment, acquitting the accused in a high-profile dowry death case. The bench, comprising of Justice Ramesh Kumar and Justice Meera Bhatt, pronounced the verdict on 15th March 2023, stating that the prosecution failed to establish sufficient evidence and granted the benefit of doubt to the accused.

The case involved the accused being charged under Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with other related charges, in connection with the unfortunate demise of a young woman due to alleged dowry harassment. However, the court observed that there was a lack of concrete evidence to prove cruelty or harassment for dowry demands, and thus the presumption in dowry death cases under Sections 113A and 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was rebutted.

The court's verdict was based on the principle that the burden of proof lies on the prosecution, and they must establish the essential elements of the alleged crime. The bench highlighted that mere suspicion cannot be the basis for conviction and that the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.

"We find insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations of cruelty or harassment by the husband or relatives of the husband. The prosecution's initial burden to establish essential elements of dowry death was not met, and thus, the burden did not shift to the accused," the court stated in its judgment.

The court also rejected certain documents produced during the trial, citing non-compliance with Sections 91 and 230 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which rendered them inadmissible as evidence.

The judgment emphasized the importance of a credible judicial process and the need for concrete evidence to secure a conviction. It emphasized that inconsistent statements and unreliable evidence cannot form the basis for depriving an individual of their liberty.

"Judicial process should be founded on credible evidence, and the accused should be given the benefit of doubt in case of material contradictions or defects in the prosecution's case," the bench opined.

The acquittal has raised discussions about the effectiveness of dowry laws and the challenges faced by courts in handling such cases. This verdict serves as a reminder that the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" holds paramount in the criminal justice system.

The court referred to and relied upon previous judgments, such as Kanchan Devi v. State of Rajasthan, Ramesh Yadav v. State of Maharashtra, and Suresh Kumar v. State of Punjab, to support its reasoning and conclusions.

Date of Decision: 3 August, 2023

Smt.Bhulana And Another vs State of U.P.     

Latest Legal News