B.J.SHETHNA, J. - (1.) ORDINARILY , while granting leave to file an appeal against the order of acquittal and admitting the appeal, this Court is not required to pass a speaking order but learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Vyas vehemently submitted that this is a Gross case in which the learned Trial Judge committed a grave error in acquitting the accused for the offence punishable u/S. 304 -B and 498A I.P.C., therefore, non -bailable warrant be also issued.
(2.) THE respondent no. 1 accused Lokesh Kumar is husband of deceased Kiran. They got married on 18.5.94 and within a period of less than five months, his wife deceased Kiran committed suicide on 7.10.94 because of the constant demand of dowry from her by her husband Lokesh Kumar and mother -in -law Bhanwari Devi. Going through the impugned order of acquittal, prima -facie it appears that the learned Judge acquitted the accused against all the well settled norms and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in umpteen number of cases. It appears that while acquitting the accused, the learned Trial Judge has not at all considered the ingredients of Sec. 304 -B I.P.C. Sec. 304 -B I.P.C. reads as under: - Dowry death. '304 B. (1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances 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 any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called 'dowry death', and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. Explanation: For the purposes of this sub -section, 'dowry' shall have the same meaning as in Sec. 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961). (2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.'
(3.) IT appears that the learned Trial Judge has also completely ignored the fact that the presumption as to dowry death has to be raised against the accused u/S. 113B of the Indian Evidence Act. Sec. 113B of the Indian Evidence Act reads as under: - Presumption as to dowry death; '113 B. When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death. Explanation: For the purposes of this section, 'dowry death' shall have the same meaning as in Sec. 304B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).' ;