The Hindu : Front Page : “Dowry cruelty conviction possible, sans specific charge”

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Aug 24, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Front Page

Front Page

“Dowry cruelty conviction possible, sans specific charge”

J. Venkatesan

NEW DELHI: Courts can convict an accused for dowry harassment and cruelty even if there is no specific charge of that offence, the Supreme Court has held.

A Bench consisting of Justices Altamas Kabir and G.S. Singhvi said: “Section 498 A was added to the Indian Penal Code in the backdrop of the growing menace of dowry-related cases in which the women were subjected to cruelty and harassment and were forced to commit suicide. This Section lays down that if the husband or his relative subjects a woman to cruelty, then he/she is liable to be punished with imprisonment for three years and a fine.”

Writing the judgment, Justice Singhvi pointed out that Section 304 B was inserted in the IPC to deal with cases of dowry deaths occurring within seven years of marriage. The ingredient of cruelty was common to 304 B and 498 A, but the scope of the two Sections was different.

The Bench said: “Section 498 A has a wider spectrum and it covers all cases in which the wife is subjected to cruelty by her husband or his relative which may result in suicide or grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental of physical) or even harassment caused with a view to coercing the woman or any person related to her to meet the unlawful demand for dowry of property or valuable security.”

The Bench said: “An accused can be convicted of dowry offence with which he may not have been specifically charged and that an error, omission or irregularity in the framing of charge by itself is not sufficient for upsetting the conviction.”

For purposes of conviction under Section 498 A, it was sufficient to prove that the woman was subjected to cruelty by her husband or his relative.

Appeal dismissed

The Bench was dismissing an appeal filed by Dinesh Seth against a Delhi High Court award of three-year imprisonment for an offence under 498 A even though he was charged only under Section 304B.

His wife, Rama, had died on November 22, 1986 in her matrimonial home in Multani Dhanda, Pharaganj, due to alleged harassment for dowry, within two years of marriage.

The High Court reduced the sentence from seven-year imprisonment imposed by a sessions court.

Seth filed the appeal contending that he could not be convicted of an offence with which he was not actually charged.

Several offences

But the Bench said: “A reading of Sections 221 (1) and 2 of the Cr.PC shows that if a single act or series of acts constitutes several offences and the prosecution is not certain about the particular offence then the accused can be charged with having committed all, some or any of the offences. In such a case, the accused can be convicted of the offence with which he may not have been specifically charged but [in which] evidence produced by the prosecution proves that such an offence has, in fact, been committed.”

The Bench held that the evidence produced was sufficient to prove that the appellant had subjected the deceased to cruelty and the High Court did not commit any error in convicting him under Section 498 A of the IPC.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page