Seeking cash for building of residence is ‘dowry need’: Supreme Court

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail


By PTI

BRAND-NEW DELHI: Seeking cash for building of a home is a ‘dowry need’ which draws in offense under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, the Supreme Court claimed on Tuesday while recovering sentence and also sentence of a male and also his daddy in a dowry fatality instance.

A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana claimed Section 304-B was placed in the IPC to fight the social wickedness of dowry need that has actually gotten to disconcerting percentages.

It cannot be suggested that in instance of an uncertainty in the language utilized in the stipulation, the exact same should certainly be understood purely as that would certainly total up to beating the extremely item of the stipulation, it claimed.

“In the light of the provision (Dowry Act) that defines the word ‘dowry’ and takes in its ambit any kind of property or valuable security, in our opinion, the High Court fell into an error by holding that the demand of money for construction of a house cannot be treated as a dowry demand,” the bench, likewise making up Justices A S Bopanna and also Hima Kohli, claimed.

The pinnacle court claimed analysis of a stipulation of legislation that will certainly beat the extremely intent of the legislature have to be avoided in favour of an analysis that will certainly advertise the item looked for to be attained with the regulations suggested to root out a social wickedness like dowry need.

“In this context words ‘Dowry’ should certainly be referred an extensive significance so regarding incorporate any kind of need made on a female, whether in regard of a residential property or an useful safety and security of any kind of nature.

“When dealing with cases under Section 304-B IPC, a provision legislated to act as a deterrent in the society and curb the heinous crime of dowry demands, the shift in the approach of the courts ought to be from strict to liberal, from constricted to dilated,” the bench claimed.

It claimed that any kind of inflexible significance would certainly often tend to bring to naught, the actual item of the stipulation.

“Therefore, a push in the right direction is required to accomplish the task of eradicating this evil which has become deeply entrenched in our society,” it claimed.

The leading court was listening to an allure submitted by Madhya Pradesh government versus the High Court judement which alloted sentence and also sentence versus hubby, father-in-law of a female, that devoted self-destruction at her marital house, under Sections 304-B (dowry fatality)and also 306 (abetment to self-destruction) of the Indian Penal Code.

The pinnacle court claimed that taking into consideration the proof prompted document by the prosecution, it has no doubt in holding that the evaluation of the test Court was right and also the participants was worthy of to be founded guilty under Sections 304-B and also 498-A IPC.

“Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court in respect of both the respondents under Section 304-B and Section 498-A IPC, is restored. However, the sentence imposed on them by the trial Court of RI for life is reduced to RI for seven years, which is the minimum sentence prescribed for an offence under Section 304-B IPC,” the bench claimed.