The Supreme Court on Friday observed that “word spreads faster than the wind” about a daughter-in-law being harassed for dowry, while acquitting a woman who had been convicted of subjecting her daughter-in-law to cruelty under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The case stemmed from a complaint filed in June 2001 by the deceased woman’s father, who alleged that his pregnant daughter had been harassed for dowry and was found dead in her matrimonial home. The complaint accused her parents-in-law and brother-in-law of cruelty and dowry-related harassment.
While the trial court acquitted the male members of the family, it convicted the mother-in-law, concluding that the woman had died by suicide due to harassment. The Uttarakhand High Court upheld the conviction and sentenced her to three years of imprisonment.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria, hearing the appeal, noted that the deceased’s family claimed she had complained about dowry harassment. However, a neighbour testified that no dowry demands were ever made.
The trial court and the high court had disregarded this testimony on the ground that dowry harassment occurs within the four walls of a house and neighbours cannot know about it. Disagreeing, the apex court remarked:
“Her evidence having been brushed aside by the trial court and also high court on the premise that she could not have deposed any fact with regard to the demand of dowry as it happens within the four walls is an erroneous finding, particularly in such matters the word spreads faster than the wind about a daughter-in-law being harassed for the dowry by the parents-in-law.”
The bench acknowledged that Section 498-A of the IPC makes cruelty towards a married woman—whether through harassment for dowry or unlawful demands—punishable. However, it stressed that the evidence on record was insufficient to link the appellant directly to her daughter-in-law’s death.
Referring to the deposition of the deceased’s mother, the court said it would not inspire confidence in a reasonable person to conclude that the mother-in-law’s alleged conduct had led to suicide.
Setting aside the Uttarakhand High Court’s order, the Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, holding that the evidence did not prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
