Delhi HC: Woman’s mere crying cannot establish dowry harassment case
The Delhi High Court ruled that a woman’s mere crying cannot establish a dowry harassment case. The court dismissed a petition challenging the discharge of her husband and in-laws, citing natural death due to pneumonia and lack of concrete evidence.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has held that mere fact that a woman was crying, cannot per se make out any case of dowry harassment.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made the observation while dismissing a petition against the discharge of a husband and his family from charges of cruelty and dowry harassment.
According to the prosecution, the woman, married in December 2010, faced harassment and dowry demands from her husband and in-laws.
Her family claimed that they spent nearly Rs 4 lakh on the wedding, alleging that later demands for a motorcycle, cash, and a gold bracelet were made by the husband and in-laws.
The woman, a mother of two daughters, died on 31 March 2014.
“Statement of the sister of the deceased under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she also stated that on the occasion of Holi, she had called her sister and found her crying. However, merely because the deceased was crying, cannot per se make out any case of dowry harassment,” the high court said.
The trial court had discharged the accused noting that the death took place due to pneumonia, a natural cause.
The high court also emphasised that the post-mortem report attributed the cause of death to pneumonia, not cruelty.
“In the present case, to bring in the clause of cruelty leading to the death of the woman, it may be noted that the deceased had died not because of any act of cruelty but for natural reasons… Therefore, Clause (a) to the Explanation annexed to Section 498A IPC is not attracted,” the Court said.
It also observed that the father of the woman neither mentioned specific incidents nor did he provide proof of giving money to the accused.
“Such bald assertions, in the given situation, cannot be held to be even making out a prima facie case of harassment,” the judge added.
