SC quashes dowry death case over lack of evidence linking husband to wife’s suicide

The Supreme Court quashed a dowry death case against a man whose wife died by suicide in Toronto, saying allegations of insults and temperamental differences did not establish cruelty or criminal intimidation. It found no evidence linking him to dowry demands

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday quashed a dowry death case against a man whose wife died by suicide in Toronto, Canada, holding that calling her “stupid” and “useless” could not, by itself, amount to an offence of cruelty or criminal intimidation.

The top court also observed that a spouse’s temperament cannot be equated with the offence of criminal intimidation.

---

A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Manmohan said no nexus had been established between the allegations levelled against the appellant and his family and the woman’s death.

“To attract the rigours of Section 304B of the IPC, the prosecution has to prove that soon before her death, the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry.

“In this aspect, the prosecution has failed to produce before this Court any cogent evidence or material that may substantiate its claim that the appellant made illegal demands for dowry and that the said demand had a reasonable nexus to the suicide committed by the deceased-wife. In absence of any evidence to support the allegation of demand for dowry, the offence under Section 304B cannot be attracted,” the bench said.

The court said judges must be extremely careful and cautious while dealing with such complaints and adopt a pragmatic approach by taking into consideration the realities of matrimonial disputes.

It said allegations in such cases must be scrutinised with great care and circumspection to prevent a miscarriage of justice and abuse of the process of law.

In this case, the man married the woman on January 3, 2021, and they subsequently moved to Toronto in February 2022. On June 11, 2023, the woman died after jumping from the 22nd floor of the residential apartment where she lived with her husband.

A handwritten suicide note was recovered from their shared apartment. In it, the woman said she felt she had failed in life because she had been unable to find a job for more than a year.

Her father lodged an FIR at Satara police station in Aurangabad on June 30, 2023, under Sections 304B (dowry death), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 498A (subjecting a woman to cruelty) and 504 (intentional insult), read with Section 34 of the IPC, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The Supreme Court said the allegations made by the woman’s father regarding mental and physical cruelty allegedly inflicted by the man and his family, as well as the alleged demand for dowry, were not corroborated.

It said a perusal of the FIR showed that the allegations of grievous hurt and criminal intimidation were vague and general.

“The allegation that the appellant used to call the deceased ‘stupid’ and ‘useless,’ even if accepted prima facie, cannot to any extent qualify as an offence of cruelty or criminal intimidation. At best, it reflects on the temperament of the husband, but it cannot be given a criminal colour so grave as to become the reason for the suicide of his wife,” it said.

The apex court said the allegation that the man was short-tempered and used to scold his wife over trivial issues was also not sustainable, as no material evidence was available on record.

“A temperamental issue of a spouse cannot be equated with the offence of criminal intimidation or grievous hurt so as to make him criminally liable for the suicide of his wife as the same would tantamount to abuse of process of law, particularly when material in support of the same is conspicuous by its absence.

“We understand the plight and pain of the family members of the deceased who have gone through the tragedy of losing their daughter but the husband and the in-laws, cannot be made to bear the brunt of the same without first demonstrating any act or omission on their part that coerced the deceased to such an extent that committing suicide was the only way out,” the bench said.

Merely alleging that the accused had subjected the woman to verbal and physical cruelty was insufficient, by itself, to raise a prima facie presumption that such acts or omissions warranted setting the criminal law in motion, it added.

“In cases involving allegations of cruelty and harassment, there would normally be specific offending acts, which the complainant would be required to spell out in specific terms against the perpetrators in order to implicate them in the criminal proceedings sought to be initiated.

“Mere general allegations of harassment, without specifics against such persons, would not suffice to continue criminal proceedings. This holds true even when the prosecution seeks to establish a reasonable nexus between the commission of suicide and the alleged harassment, cruelty, and criminal intimidation,” the bench said.