How cruelty, harassment impact woman’s mind, Jharkhand High Court defines

The couple got married in July 1991, and the woman died in 1995, within seven years of her marriage.

The man was challenging the sentence awarded by the session court in 1998, which sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life, while his parents were sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment.

“Physical cruelty could be actual beating or causing pain and harm to the person of a woman. Every such instance of cruelty and related harassment has a different impact on the mind of a woman. Some instances may be so grave as to have a lasting impact on a woman. Some instances which degrade her dignity may remain, etched in her memory for a long time,” the court said.

The high court, in its January 6 order, concluded that there was a demand for dowry and torture by referring to the various letters written by the victim in 1993, where she mentioned torture for money and being beaten. She also stated about the apprehension of her death and signing the divorce papers by force.

Upholding the conviction, the high court found that the state had proved the charges against the man and his parents beyond all “shadow of doubt” with no requirement to interfere with the session court’s order.

Different shades of mental cruelty

Emphasising the need that the cruelty or harassment may differ from case to case, the high court said that the cruelty can be “mental or physical”.

The court further pointed out that mental cruelty has also “different shades” and can be “verbal or emotional”, like insulting or ridiculing or humiliating a woman.

“It can be depriving her of economic resources or essential amenities of life. The list is illustrative and not exhaustive,” the order read.

‘Soon before’

The court referred to section 304 B of the IPC and highlighted that the demand of dowry should be “soon before the death of the deceased”.

Section 304B IPC says that “if a woman dies by burn or injury within seven years of her marriage, and it is shown that soon before her death, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or their relative demanding dowry, the death is called ‘dowry death’ and such husband or relative will be considered to have caused her death”.

Focusing on the term “soon before” provided in Section 304B of the IPC, the bench pointed out that the circumstances showing the cruelty or harassment with the victim are not restricted to a “particular instance” but normally refer to a “course of conduct”.

Highlighting that soon before does not mean “immediately before”, the court said that such conduct may be spread “over a period of time”.

The court further pointed out that “soon before” is a relative term required to be considered under specific circumstances of each case, and held that “no straitjacket formula” can be provided by fixing any time limit.

“Proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the consequential death is required to be proved by the prosecution”, the court added.