Allahabad High Court slams Indian parents for sending daughters back to abusive homes

“It is unfortunately a prevalent practice in India that the daughter is considered to be a burden upon her parents who seek to wash their hands of her fate as soon as she is married and are unconcerned with her well being thereafter. The said conduct of the parents of such brides who are harassed or killed on account of dowry demand in fact are abettor of the in laws of such bribes,” the court said on August 25.

Justice Manish Mathur partly allowed the appeal.

Dowry death case

According to the prosecution, the victim had suffered fatal burn injuries within two years of her marriage. The prosecution alleged that the family had demanded buffaloes, a television and a bicycle as dowry and harassed her over the unmet demands. It was stated that the incident thereafter took place in 1999, when the complainant’s daughter was allegedly burnt alive and subsequently passed away in the hospital.

The trial court had convicted the victim’s husband and her two in-laws under Sections 498-A (cruelty) and 304-B (dowry death) of the IPC and Section 4 (penalty for demanding dowry) of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The court found that the aspects of Section 304-B IPC stood satisfied as the death took place within two years of marriage and was as a result of an unnatural cause i.e burning. It further noted that the aspect of harassment due to dowry demand was also substantiated by trial court on the basis of dying declaration of the victim given to her mother.

“The dying declaration clearly corroborates the burn injuries since it has been stated that the mother-inlaw and sister-in-law had set fire to her after tying her hands and feet,” the court said.

The court however found that the prosecution evidence did not prove the husband’s role in setting his wife on fire. It noted that dying declaration did not accuse him of participating in the act. On the contrary, the court noted that the victim’s statement indicated that the husband attempted to extinguish the fire by throwing a bucket of water over her and had also taken her for medical treatment.

“It is not the case of prosecution that the appellant no.1 was also instrumental in setting fire to the victim-deceased. On the contrary, in the dying declaration as noticed by trial court, it has been stated that once the victim-deceased was on fire, appellant no.1 (husband) sought to douse the fire by throwing a bucket of water over her,” the court observed.

The court therefore set aside his conviction under Section 304-B IPC. However, it maintained his conviction under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The convictions and sentences of the two women were upheld. All three appellants were directed to surrender before the trial court within three weeks to serve their sentences.

Before parting with the case, the court lamented over the conduct of parents of victim, who despite being intimated time and again by their daughter with regard to harassment being suffered by her as a result of dowry demands, continuously kept sending her back to her matrimonial house ignoring her disparate plea even when she informed them that she may be murdered for such dowry demand.