Signing you in

The bench, also comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, declined to interfere with the findings of the trial court and the Chhattisgarh High Court, both of which had upheld convictions under Sections 304B (dowry death), 306 (abetment of suicide) and 498A (cruelty and harassment) of the Indian Penal Code.

The case pertained to the death of a woman by hanging within three years of her marriage. According to the prosecution, the woman was subjected to prolonged harassment and repeated dowry demands, including demands for cash and a car, by her husband and in-laws.

The trial court had held that the death occurred under unnatural circumstances within seven years of marriage, thereby attracting the statutory presumption of dowry death. Testimonies from the woman’s family pointed to repeated financial demands and cruelty “soon before” her death.

Medical evidence confirmed that the woman died due to asphyxia caused by hanging. However, the courts found that the persistent dowry demands, payments allegedly made shortly before the incident and continued harassment established a direct link between the cruelty inflicted and the woman’s death.

The present appeal before the Supreme Court was filed by the deceased woman’s younger brother-in-law, who sought relief from his conviction under Section 498A IPC.

His counsel argued that only the offence under Section 498A had been invoked against him and that the allegations were insufficient to sustain the conviction.

The Bench, however, remained unconvinced. “You should be happy that it is only 498A and only three years,” Justice Nagarathna remarked.

Highlighting what the court described as a recurring pattern of financial coercion in matrimonial homes, Justice Nagarathna said, “Attempt is to squeeze the bride and her family.”

Referring to the allegations placed before the court, she further observed, “What exactly did the boy’s family say? You people are beggars; you cannot pay. The girl’s family was pleading to save their daughter and they were being called beggars.”

When the petitioner’s counsel attempted to respond, Justice Nagarathna interjected, “You should have kept quiet. Bride’s father said they can give Rs 60k and you call them beggars?”

The petitioner’s counsel also argued that there had been a delay in lodging the FIR but the court refused to accept the contention.

The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions recorded by the lower courts.

This hearing comes amid outrage over the death of Twisha Sharma, who was found hanging at her marital home in Bhopal five months after her wedding. Her family has alleged dowry demands and sustained abuse by her husband Samarth, a lawyer by profession, and former judge mother-in-law, allegations they deny.