Supreme Court of India
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Citation
- 2010 INSC 770
- Decided
- 11 November 2010
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Bench
- P SATHASIVAM
Holding
The High Court’s reversal of the trial court acquittal was perverse; the prosecution did not establish the dowry demand or cruelty, and the conviction under Sections 306/34 and 498A/34 IPC cannot stand.
Summary
The deceased, Neeru Gupta, committed suicide in 1985 and her brother filed a complaint alleging dowry demand and ill‑treatment by her husband and in‑laws. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding no proof of dowry demand or cruelty and noting the deceased suffered from mental illness. The High Court reversed the acquittal, relying on a psychiatrist's testimony and the alleged suspicion of an illicit relationship, and convicted the husband and father‑in‑law under Sections 306/34 and 498A/34 IPC. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the credibility of witnesses, emphasizing that material contradictions, improvements and embellishments in statements render such evidence unreliable. It held that the prosecution failed to prove the dowry demand or cruelty beyond reasonable doubt and that the High Court had erred in overturning the trial court's findings. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court judgment, restored the trial court acquittal, and discharged the appellants' bail bonds.
Issues considered
- The High Court's power to reverse an acquittal on the basis of re‑evaluated evidence.
- Whether the alleged dowry demand and ill‑treatment were proved beyond reasonable doubt under Sections 306/34 and 498A/34 IPC.
- The effect of material contradictions, improvements and embellishments in witness statements on their credibility.
- The relevance of a suspicion of an illicit relationship to the charge of cruelty.
- The applicability of the presumption of service of a registered letter under the General Clauses Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 161
- General Clauses Act, 1897s. 27
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872s. 114
- Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 306, s. 34, s. 498A
Subjects
dowry deathsuicideSection 306 IPCSection 498A IPCevidence evaluationmaterial contradictionspresumption of serviceappellate review of acquittalmental illnessillicit relationship
Judgment
[2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 452
A DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA AND ORS.
v.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
(Criminal Appeal No. 891 of 2004)
NOVEMBER 11, 2010
B
[P. SATHASIVAM AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860: ss. 306134 and 498A/34 - Conviction
under - Suicide by married woman 6 years after marriage -
c A/legation against husband and parents-in-law that they ill
treated the deceased and suspected that the deceased had
illicit relation with a family friend and that they demanded
dowry few days prior to her death and all that compelled the
deceased to commit suicide - Acquittal by trial court -
0 Conviction by High Court - Challenged - Held: Cumulative
effect of medical evidence given by three doctors led to the
inference that the deceased suffered from manic depression
and had mental/psychosis problem - The protests on part of
the accused even on a mere suspicion, and asking the
E deceased to keep distance from the family friend, with whom
they suspected she was illicitly involved cannot be termed as
unwarranted - Depositions of father, brother and aunt of
deceased were full of contradictions and exaggerations -
Allegation of demand of gold ornaments by mother-in-law not
F found plausible - Certain vital facts stated for the first time in
court which were neither mentioned in statements made u/
s.161 Cr.P.C. nor in FIR - It was a case of gross abuse of
dowry laws - High Court dealt with the case very casually,
adopting a very superficial approach to the whole matter and
brushed aside the a/legation of illicit relationship, for which
G there had been documentary evidence, without recording any
cogent reasons for the same - High Court did not make any
attempt to appreciate the evidence with accuracy and
reversed the findings of the trial court which were based on
H 452
OR. S~ KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAt: GUPTA v. 453
. -STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
evidence and detailed reasons - Code of Criminal Procedure, A
1973 - s.161.
Evidence:
Contradictions/Omissions/Discrepancy/Improvement in
evidence - Reliability of such evidence - Discussed. B
Statement made in FIR or u/s.161 Cr.P.C. not disclosing
certain facts - Disclosing those facts for the first time in court
- Reliability of such evidence - Discussed - Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.161. c
Discrepancy in evidence - Normal and material ·
discrepancy - Distinction between, and their respective effect
on the credibility of a party's case.
Presumption of service . .,. Registered letter - Held: There D
is a presumption of service of a letter sent under registered
cover- No doubt, the presumption is rebuttable and it is open
to the party concerned to place evidence before the court to
rebut the presumption by showing that the address mentioned
on the cover was incorrect or that the postal authorities never E
' tendered the registered letter to him - The burden to rebut
the presumption lies on the party challenging the factum of
service.
Appeal against acquittal: Interference by appellate court,
F
with the order of acquittal passed by the trial court - Scope
of.
The prosecution case was that the victim-deceased
got married to appellant no.1on1.12.1978. A female child ·
was born out of the wedlock in the year 1981. The victim G
committed suicide on 28.9.1985. PW-2, the brother of the
deceased filed a complaint against the appellants who
were the husband and the parents-in-law of the deceased
alleging that they had been demanding gold ornaments
H
454 SUPREME C0URT RfPURf0, ! J10] 1c:; (AODL) SC R
A and ill-treating the deceased, which drove the deceased
to commit suicide.
The trial court acquitted all the accused on the
ground that the alleged demand of gold ornaments or ill-
s treatment of the deceased could not be established and
the letters produced by the prosecution were neither
suggestive of ill-treatment nor of demand of dowry; that
no such allegations were made either while lodging the
FIR or in the statements recorded under Section 161,
C Cr.P.C. and such allegations were made for the first time
only while making statements before the court during
trial; and there were material contradictions and
improvements in the testimonies of witnesses which
made them unreliable.
D The High Court relied upon the deposition of the
doctor (PW.10) that the deceased had told him that she
was deprived of love and affection by her family members
and had no faith any of them. The High Court held thdt
the defence failed to establish that the deceased was
E suffering from epilepsy before her marriage and that there
was existence of any illicit relationship between the
deceased and a family friend 'Kake'. It further held that
there had been a demand of a gold chain by appellant
No.3, the mother-in-law of the deceased. Accordingly, the
F High Court convicted the appellants under Sections 306/
34 and 498A/34 IPC. The instant appeal was filed
challenging the order of conviction. During pendency of
appeal, appellant no.3 died and her appeal stood abated.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
G
HELD: 1.1. Material Contradictions: While
appreciating the evidence, the court has to take into
consideration whether the contradictions/omissions had
been of such magnitude that they may materially affect
H the trial. Minor contradictions, inconsistencies,
DR SUNiL KUMAR SAMBHUDAY:\L GUPT.A. v. 455
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
embellishments or improvements on trivial matters A
without effecting the core of the prosecution case should
not be made a ground to reject the evidence in its entirety.
The trial court, after going through the entire evidence.
must form an opinion about the credibility of the
witnesses and the appellate court in normal course would B
not be justified in reviewing the same again without
justifiable reasons. Where the omission amount to a
contradiction, creating a serious doubt about the
truthfulness of a witness and other witness also make
material improvements before the court in order to make c
the evidence acceptable, it cannot be safe to rely upon
such evidence. The discrepancies in the evidence of eye-
witnesses, if found to be not minor in nature, may be a
ground for disbelieving and discrediting their evidence.
!n such circumstances, witnesses may not inspire 0
confidence and if their evidence is found to be in conflict
and contradiction with other evidence or with the
statement already recorded, in such a case it cannot be
held that prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable
doubt. In case, the complainant in the FIR or the witness E
in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., has not
disclosed certain facts but meets the prosecution case
first time before the court, such version lacks credence
and is liable to be discarded. [Paras 14, 15, 16, 17) [480-
C-H; 481-A-B]
F
State Represented by Inspector of Police v. Saravanan
&.Anr. AIR 2009 SC 152; State of Rajasthan v. Rajendra
Singh (2009) 11 SCC 106; Mahendra Pratap Singh v. State
of Uttar Pradesh (2009) 11 SCC 334; State Represented by
Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu v. Sait @ Krishnakumar G
(2008) 15 SCC 440; State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Ka!ki & Anr.
AIR 1981 SC 1390 - relied on.
1.2. The courts have to lc:iJel the category to which a
discrepancy belongs. While normal discrepancies do
H
456 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A not corrode the credibility of a party's case, material
discrepancies do so. Mere marginal variations in the
statements cannot be dubbed as improvements as the
same may be elaborations of the statement made by the
witness earlier. The omissions which amount to
B contradictions in material particulars i.e. go to the root of
the case/materially affect the trial or core of the
prosecution's case, render the testimony of the witness
liable to be discredited. [Paras 19, 21] [481-E-F; 482-A-
B]
c Syed Ibrahim v. State of A.P. AIR 2006 SC 2908;
Arumugam v. State AIR 2009 SC 331; Bihari Nath Goswami
v. Shiv Kumar Singh & Ors. (2004) 9 SCC 186 - relied on.
2.1. Appeal against Acquittal: While dealing with a
D judgment of acquittal, an appellate court must consider
the entire evidence on record, so as to arrive at a finding
as to whether the views of the trial court were perverse
or otherwise unsustainable. Even though the appellate
court is entitled to consider, whether in arriving at a
E finding of fact, the trial court had placed the burden of
proof incorrectly or failed to take into consideration any
admissible evidence and/or had taken into consideration
evidence brought on record contrary to law; the appellate
court should not ordinarily set aside a judgment of
F acquittal in a case where two views are possible, though
the view of the appellate court may be the more probable
one. The trial court which has the benefit of watching the
demeanor of the witnesses is the best judge of the
credibility of the witnesses. [Para 22] [482-C-E]
G 2.2. Every accused is presumed to be innocent
unless his guilt is proved. The presumption of innocence
is a human right. Subject to the statutory exceptions, the
said principle forms the basis of criminal jurisprudence
in India. The nature of the offence, its seriousness and
H gravity has to be taken into consideration. The appellate
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 457
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
court should bear in mind the presumption of innocence A
of the accused, and further, that the trial court's acquittal
bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interference
with the decision of the trial court in a casual or cavalier
manner where the other view is possible should be
avoided, unless there are good reasons for such B
interference. In exceptional cases where there are
compelling circumstances, and the judgment under
appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can
interfere with the order of acquittal. The findings of fact
recorded by a court can be held to be perverse if the c
findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding
relevant material or by taking into consideration
irrelevant/inadmissible material. A finding may also be
. said to be perverse if it is 'against the weight of evidence',
or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer 0
from the vice of irrationality. [Paras 23, 24] (482-F-H; 483-
A-C] . .
Balak Ram & Anr. v. State of UP. AIR 1974 SC 2165;
Shai/endra Pratap & Anr. v. State of UP. AIR 2003 SC 1104;
Budh Singh & Ors. v. State of UP. AIR 2006 SC 2500; S. E
Rama Krishna v. S. Rami Reddy (D) by his LRs. & Ors. AIR
2008 SC 2066; Aru/velu & Anr. v. State (2009) 10 SCC 206;
Ram Singh alias Chhaju v. State of Himacha/ Pradesh (2010)
2 SCC 445; Babu v. State of Kera/a (2010) 9 SCC 189 -
relied on. F
3.1. The record revealed that at an initial stage the
relationship between husband and wife had been very
cordial and they had love and affection for each other. It
was only at a later stage when the family suspected an G
illicit relationship between the deceased and 'Kake' that
the appellants were very much disturbed. Both the
families made serious attempts to re-concile and patch.
up the matter and the appellants had agreed that the
: deceased may be given an opportunity to improve her H
458 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C R
A behaviour. Thus, admittedly there was a doubt that the
deceased had developed serious intimacy with 'Kake',
which was much more than what happens in normal
course with a family friend. Therefore, the finding
recorded by the High Court that the intimacy between
B them to the extent of having an illicit relationship was not
there, loses its significance, for the reason that even the
suspicion of such a matter becomes the talk of the town
and the reputation of the family remains at stake. The
protests on the part of the appellants even on a mere
c suspicion and asking the deceased to keep distance from
'Kake' or improve her behaviour was not something
which can be termed to be unwarranted or uncalled for.
[Para 25] (483-E-H; 484-A-B]
3.2. There had been a lot of improvements and
D contradictions in statements of the doctor (PW-10). He
deposed for the first time in the court during the trial, that
when he went to examine the deceased, she was found
in an unkept room/store room and that he was
introduced to the deceased as a Psychiatrist and that the
E deceased had asked him whether he treated his wife in
the same way as she had been treated by her husband.
None of this was mentioned in his statement recorded by
the police. Nor it had been recorded therein that the
deceased had told him that she was harassed by the
F appellants and her ornaments were taken away/worn by
her mother-in-law (A.3). More so, he had not stated in his
police statement that the deceased was merely mentally
disturbed and not suffering from a gross psychological
problem. Nor had he stated therein that the deceased had
G told him that she was not having any faith in any of her
family members and she was deprived of their love,
affection and sympathy. Such contradictions in his
statements cannot be held to be mere explanations or
elaborations of his version, but tantamount to material
H contradictions or vital omissions. The rules of
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 459
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
appreciation of evidence requires that court should not A
draw conclusions by picking up an isolated sentence of
a witness without adverting to the statement as a whole.
In such a fact-situation, it is not safe to rely on his
testimony for the simple reason that he had made a lot
of improvements/embellishments while deposing in court B
and vital .contradictions existed with his earlier recorded
statement. Thus, no reliance could be placed on his
depositions to hold that appellants had ill-treated the
deceased or that appellant no.3 had taken away/worn her
ornaments or that she had been deprived of their love c
and affection or that she was not suffering from epilepsy
etc. The deposition of the doctor (PW.1) revealed that
E.C.T. treatment is given only to mental patients, who
have mental depression and tend to commit suicide; the
ailment of epileptic fits is a neurological problem. This
0
view stood fully corroborated by the deposition of the
doctor (PW.12), Reader in Psychiatric Medicine, Mental
Hospital, Kanpur. He had examined the deceased and
prescribed medicines for manic depressive Psychosis.
The prescription of this witness substantially remained
E
the same as of PW.10. The cumulative effect of the
medical evidence given by three doctors would lead to
the conclusion that deceased had been suffering from
manic depression and certainly had some mental/
epileptic/ psychosis problem. [Paras 28, 29] [485-E-H;
486-A] F
3.3. The other witnesses were the father, brother and
the aunt of the deceased. Being close relatives, in such
facts and circumstances, they might have developed
inimical feelings towards the appellants, since they came G
to the conclusion that the appellants were responsible
for the death of the deceased. However, their depositions ·
were full of contradictions and have marked
improvements from their statements recorded earlier. The
exaggerations and improvements are of such a nature H
460 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R
A that they made their whole statements in respect of the
demand for gold ornaments and/or the ill-treatment of the
deceased liable to total disregard on these counts. Gold
ornaments had been given by the complainants to the
deceased out of love and free will at the time of the
B marriage of PW.2 and at the time of birth of daughter of
the deceased. Undoubtedly, PW.2 had alleged in the FIR
that there had been demand of gold ornaments by the
appellants but without any details of the same. He could
not furnish any explanation as why this fact was not
c disclosed to the police when his statement and
supplementary statement was recorded. Also no such
inference could be drawn from any of the letters on
record. Only one un-dated letter (Ext.P-21) written by the
deceased to her father suggested that her mother in-law
had been asking for a gold chain. More so, as the chain
0
had been given by the complainants to the deceased just
2/3 months before her death, and there was no evidence
that any further demand had been there, the issue
became totally irrelevant in terms of proving the motive,
and it cannot be presumed that any demand was made.
E More so, even if it is presumed that there was some
demand by appellant No.3, as she is no more, and her
appeal stood abated, this issue has become totally
irrelevant for the reason that no such allegation had ever
been made against the remaining two appellants. [Para
F 29) [486-B-G]
3.4. The relations between the parties became
strained because of the suspicion that the deceased was
having an illicit relationship with 'Kake'. However, it was
G admitted by PW.8, father of the deceased, that
subsequently the relations became normal and they were
invited at the house of the appellants after the deceased
tendered an apology to her mother-in- law. The said
witness did not state in his statement before the police
H that when he went to see the appellants, they had asked
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 461
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
him whether he had brought gold ornaments or that he A
was told that the deceased would not be allowed to live
there and they would make her condition even more
·miserable. Such an improvement was made while
deposing in court and no explanation could be furnished
by him. as to why such vital facts were not stated by him B
at the time of recording his statement under Section 161
Cr.P.C. This statement is to be discarded as it is not safe
to hold the appellants guilty of the offences alleged
against them on such an improved version. The
deposition of PW.7, aunt of the deceased is by no means c
different, as she had also made major contradictions and
· improvements in her statement made in court. She had
not stated in her police statement that the appellants were
demanding gold ornaments from the deceased and her
family or that the appellants· were keeping the deceased D
starving and were not allowing her to meet her daughter.
The explanation furnished by her that she had not been
feeling well and had forgotten to narrate such material
facts, cannot be believed. The statement of PW.2, the
brother of the deceased was also full of contradictions
E
and suffered from major improvements. The
contradictions were of such a nature that they impaired
the whole of his evidence. The same cannot be held to
be clarificatory. He was not in a position to state what
ornaments his family had presented to the deceased on
different occasions. He could not even furnish an F
explanation as to why the demand of a gold chain was
not evident from any of the letters between the parties,
except in the letter (Ext. P-21 ). The complainants have
denied the receipt of letter written by appellant no.2 to the
father of the deceased. However, the appellants have G
produced the correspondence with the post office and
proved the postal stamp to show that the said letter was
sent by registered A.D. to PW.8. The law in this regard is
well settled. There is a presumption of service of a letter
H
462 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL J S C H
A sent under registered cover. No doubt, the presumption
is rebuttable and it is open to the party concerned to
place dvidence before the court to rebut the presumption
by showing that the address mentioned on the cover
was incorrect or that the postal authorities never tenderer!
B the registered letter to him. The burden to rebut the
presumption lies on the party challenging the factum of
service. It was the responsibility of the complainants to
prove by adducing evidence of the official of the Post
Office, that the said letter had not been delivered to them.
c However, for the reasons best known to the prosecution
such an exercise was not undertaken. [Paras 30-33] [487-
A-H; 488-A-C-E-F; 489-8]
Gujarat Electricity Board & Anr. v. Atmaram Sungomal
Poshani AIR 1989 SC 1433; Cfuef Commissioner of /ncom'J
D Tax (Administration), Bangalore v. V.K Gururaj and Ors
(1996) 7 SCC 275; Shim/a Development Authority and Ors.
v. Santosh Sharma (smt.) and Anr. (1997) 2 SCC 637;
Harihar Banerji v. Ramshashi Roy AIR (1918) PC 102 - relied
on.
E
4.1. The instant case is required to be examined from
another angle also. The marriage took place on 1st
December, 1978. The complainant party could not place
any correspondence on record prior to February 1985
F except letter dated 24th February, 1979 written by the
deceased herself to her husband. However, it also goes
in favour of the appellants. The controversy arose only
after the expiry of the period of more than 6 years fro111
the date of marriage. It is quite possible that the dispute
arose between the parties only because of the suspicion
G that the deceased had developed an illicit relationship
with 'Kake'. Had there been a demand of dowry or ill-
treatment to her on any other ground by the appellants.
there could have been some correspondence between
the parties during the said long period of more than 6
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 463
STATE. OF MAHARASHTRA
years. None of the prosecution witnesses had made any A
allegation of any demand of dowry or ill treatment during
the said earlier period. It is unnatural that after expiry of
such a long period, the appellants suddenly became
greedy and started demanding ornaments and for not
meeting their demand, started ill treating the deceased to B
the extent that she had to commit suicide. Thus, the
allegations made by the complainant party remained
unnatural and improbable. More so, the demand had
been only of a thin gold chain which could not be very
expensive in those days, especially Considering the c
socio-economic status of all the parties. For the gold
ornament worth such a petty amount after the expiry of
a long period of about 6 % years. from the date of
marriage, it is not natural that the appellants could treat
the deceased with such cruelty that she was drawn to
D
commit suicide. [Para 34] [489-C-H; 490-A]
4.2. It is a c.lear cut case of gross abuse of the dowry
laws. It is difficult to sustain the conviction of the
appellants on the said counts based upon the
inconsistent, embellished and improved statements of the E
witnesses, which materially contradict their respective
statements recorded earlier. The High Court did not
dislodge the reasons given by the trial court for acquittal.
The High Court did not make any reference to the
deposition of PW.10 in the cross-examination and dealt F
with the case very casually, adopting a very superficial
approach to the whole matter and brushed aside the
allegation of an illicit relationship for which there had
been documentary evidence on record without recording
any cogent reasons for the same. The High Court did not G
make any attempt to appreciate the evidence with
accuracy and reversed the findings of the trial court
which were based on the evidence on record and for
which detailed reasons had been assigned. [Para 35]
[490-B-E] H
464 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (AOOL.) S.C.R.
1
A Case Law Reference:
AIR 2009 SC 152 relied on Para 14
(2009) 11 sec 106 relied on Para 15
(2009) 11 sec 334 relied on Para 16
B
(2008) 15 sec 440 relied on Para 17
AIR 1981 SC 1390 relied on Para 18
AIR 2006 SC 2908 relied on Para 19
c
AIR 2009 SC 331 relied on Para 19
(2004) 9 sec 186 relied on Para 20
AIR 1974 SC 2165 relied on Para 24
D AIR 2003 SC 1104 relied on Para 24
AIR 2006 SC 2500 relied on Para 24
AIR 2008 SC 2066 relied on Para 24
E (2009) 1o sec 206 relied on Para 24
(201 o) 2 sec 445 relied on Para 24
(2010) 9 sec 189 relied on Para 24
AIR 1989 SC 1433 relied on Para 33
F
(1996) 1 sec 215 relied on Para 33
(1997) 2 sec 637 relied on Para 33
AIR (1918) PC 102 relied on Para 33
G
CRIMINAL APP ELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 891 of 2004.
From the Judgment & Order dated 29.4.2004 of the High
Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 865 of
H 1987.
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUOAYAL GUPTA v. 465
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
K.T,S. Tulsi, Niraj Gupta, Raj Kamal, Arputham, Aruna & A
Co., for the Appellants.
Sushil Karanikar, Sanjay V. Kharde, Asha Gopalan Nair
for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B
DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred
against the judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay,
dated 29.4.2004, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 865 of 1987,
by which the High Court has reversed the judgment and order C
of the Trial Court acquitting the appellants of the charges under
Sections 306/34 and 498A/34 of the Indian Penal. Code, 1860
(hereinafter called as 'IPC').
2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that
0
appellant No.1 got married to one Neeru Gupta (hereinafter
called as 'the deceased') on 1.12.1978 by way .of an arranged
m,arriage. Out of the said wedlock, a female child named Mili
was born in 1981. There had been some disputes between
the husband and wife on petty matters. Neeru committed suicide
on 28.9.1985 by hanging herself in the bathroom when all the. E
other family members had gone outside. Rajesh (PW.2),
brother of the deceased, filed a complaint dated 30.9.1985,
against the appellants i.e. the husband and parents in law of
the deceased, alleging that they had been demanding dowry
and had given ill treatment to the deceased, and that is why F
Neeru committed suicide. The police investigated the matter
and filed the charge sheet against all the three appellants on
9.1.1986 under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC and
Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution
examined a large number of witnesses to substantiate its case. G
After the conclusion of the trial, the Sessions Court vide its
judgment and order dated 21.5.1987, held that the deceased
had committed suicide. However, no role could be attributed
to any of the appellants for the same, and the prosecution failed
to prove any of the charges beyond reasonable doubt against H
466 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010) 15 (ADDL) S.C.R
A the appellants. The witnesses examined by the prosecution
improved their version with regard to claims of the alleged
demands, particularly in respect of the gold ornaments and ill
treatment of the deceased. The Trial Court came to the
conclusion that the deceased was suffering from epilepsy,
B psychosis and depression and had been getting regular
treatment for the same. Therefore, it was not a case of dowry
demand or treating her with cruelty.
3. Being aggrieved, the State of Maharashtra preferred
Criminal Appeal No.865 of 1987 before the High Court of
C Bombay and the High Court reversed the order of acquittal,
convicted the appellants vide its judgment and order dated
29.4.2004 and imposed the punishment of 3 years RI on the
husband, appellant No.1, and 2 years on the other appellants
i.e. the in-laws of the deceased. Hence, this appeal.
D
4. Shri K.T.S Tulsi, learned senior counsel appearing for
the appellants, has submitted that the High Court failed to
appreciate the medical evidence and depositions of the
prosecution witnesses in the right perspective, as the same
E could not establish conclusively that the suicide by the
deceased could be attributed to the appellants to any extent. It
was a clear cut case of suicide because of depression, as the
deceased had been suffering from epilepsy and other mental
disorders. The deceased had developed an illicit relationship
F with a family friend, Kake, and a letter written by the said Kake
had been in the possession of the other family members and,
therefore, they had informed her parents and brother about the
said illicit relationship. The medical evidence, particularly, the
deposition of Dr. Daulatram Nekumal Gurbani (PW.10) made
G it clear that the deceased had been suffering from serious
depression and such a patient often develops suicidal
tendencies. The deceased had also made an attempt earlier
to commit suicide in 1985 and she had been taken to the local
hospital. Subsequently, she had also been treated at Kanpur.
The findings of fact recorded by the Trial Court that there was
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 467
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. S.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
neither any demand of gold ornaments or any kind of dowry, A
nor had the deceased been subjected to cruelty, could not be
held to be perverse by the High Court to bring home the
charges against the appellants under Sections 306 or 498A
IPC. The parents-in-law of the deceased were not living at
Kalyan, as the appellant No.2 had been transferred to B
' Kurudwadi in 1983 and the deceased was living with her
husb,and i.e. appellant No.1, at Kalyan. The High Court
committed an error in shifting the burden of proof to the defence
as the court observed that the defence failed to prove its
versiqn. In fact the prosecution has to prove its case beyond c
reasonable doubt and the failure of the defence to prove the
def~rice version cannot be a ground for conviction. More so,
as_ there has been no abetment to suicide, the provisions of
Section 306 IPC could not be attracted. Thus, in view of above,
the appeal deserves to be allowed.
D
5. On the contrary, Shri Sushil Karanjakar, learned counsel
appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the appeal
contending that the High Court's judgment is based on cogent
reasons and on a proper appreciation of the evidence on
record. The High Court has correctly reached the conclusion E
that the findings of fact recorded by the Trial Court were
perverse. The High Court is the final court of facts, its findings
do not deserve to be disturbed by this Court in a routine
' manner. There is sufficient evidence on record to prove the
demand of dowry and abetment to suicide. Therefore, no F
interference is required by this Court with the findings of fact
recorded by the High Court. The appeal lacks merit and, thus,
is liable to be dismissed.
6. We have considered the rival submissions made; by G
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. Before proceeding further, it may be pertinent to
mention here that Shri K.T.S Tulsi, learned senior counsel
appearing for the appellants, has informed us that appellant
No.3, Sou. Pushamalati Sambhudayal Gupta died in the month H
468 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A of February, 2010. In view thereof, the appeal by appellant No.3
stands abated and we only have to consider the case of ·
appellant Nos. 1 and 2, i.e., the husband and the father-in-law
of the deceased.
8. The Trial Court after appreciating the depositions of the
8
witnesses and examining the documentary evidence on record
came to the conclusion that the alleged demand of gold
ornaments or ill-treatment of the deceased could not be
established and none of the letters produced by the prosecution
C has been suggestive of either of ill-treatment or demand of
dowry. None of the prosecution witnesses, i.e. the family
members of the deceased, made such allegations either while
lodging the FIR or in their statements recorded under Section
161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called
'Cr.P.C.'). Such allegations had been made for the first time
D while making statements before the court during trial. There
were material contradictions and improvements, which were not
mere elaborations of their statements already made. Thus,
their statements in regard to those allegations were liable to
be discarded.
E
9. The High Court reversed the findings of fact recorded
by the Trial Court, mainly relying upon the evidence of Dr.
Daulatram Nekumal Gurubani (PW.10), as he had deposed that
when he had examined the deceased, she told him that she
i:: had been deprived of love and affection by her family members.
She had no faith in any member of her family. He had also
opined that it was not a case of psychosis, but the deceased
had been suffering from a mental disorder. The High Court also
reached the conclusion that the defence failed to establish that
G the deceased was suffering from epilepsy before her marriage.
The stay of the deceased along with her parents in a Guest
House for two-three days after going from Kanpur to Kalyan has
also been taken by the High Court as a circumstance adverse
to the appellants. The High Court also came to the conclusions
H that the intimacy between the deceased and Kake did not
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 469
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
mean that she had illicit relationship with Kake; and there had A
been a demand of a gold chain by appellant No.3.
10. As the High Court has reversed the order of acquittal
and taken a view contrary to the view taken by the Trial Court,
we have taken upon ourselves the task of appreciation of
8
evidence and considered the legal and factual issues involved
in the case.
11. Letters written by the parties to each other:
(A) A large number of letters had been placed on record c
before the Trial Court by both the parties. Letter dated
24:2.1979 (Ext.P-26), written by the deceased to her
husband, about 3 months after the marriage reveals that
there was no problem in the relationship between the
husband and wife. In fact, it suggests that they had deep D
love and affection for each other.
(B) Letter dated 3.4.1985, written by appellant no. 2 to the
father of the deceased, makes it evident that something
had gone wrong and the behaviour of the deceased had
been totally unwarranted, as it revealed that she had gone E
out of the house i.e. on the main road, half-naked and she
had brought disrepute to the family of her in-laws. However,
they had been tolerating such behaviour. She had lowered
their prestige so much that they had not been able to show
their faces to anyone. It suggested an illicit relationship F
between the deceased and one family friend, Kake. It also
?uggested that the deceased wanted to live with the said
·Kake, as she had developed love for him and she was
willing to elope with him. It also suggested that it was .
wrong on the part of Smt. Shanti (mother of the deceased) G
to have been giving wrong advice to the deceased and
making false allegations that her in-laws were not treating
her properly. According to this letter, the deceased had
declared that she was no longer interested in Sunil, her
husband, as she did not like him any more and in the end H
470 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A appellant No.2 had expressed great concern about his
grand daughter Mili and stated that he was willing to keep
her in a hostel so that she could be spared humiliation
because of the illicit relationship between the deceased
and Kake. The author of the letter suggested to the father
B of the deceased that he should call the deceased to
Kanpur as there could be some untoward/disastrous
incident in future.
(C) The undated letter (Ext. P-2) purported to have been
written by Kake to the deceased, gives an impression that
c the deceased had not only deep intimacy, but something
more with Kake. Kake was also in possession of some
of her photographs which he claimed to be his fortune and
said that the same would not be returned to her as she had
requested and would be burnt only with the end of his life.
D This letter also suggested that he had the opportunity to
have a physical relationship with her.
(D) There are several other letters on record showing that
after the development of the intimacy between Kake and
E the deceased, both families were disturbed and attempts
had been made from both the sides to patch up the matter.
However, none of the letters suggests any demand of
dowry or ill treatment to the deceased amounting to cruelty
by the appellants.
F (E) The letter dated 7.7.1985 written by the complainant,
Rajesh, brother of the deceased to appellant No.1, is
suggestive in nature. It suggests that appellant no. 1 should
try to save the prestige of the family at any cost and forget
all that had happened in the past, as the deceased was
G willing to improve herself and accept any advice given by
her husband. Another letter dated 9.7.1985, written by the
informant, Rajesh, brother of the deceased to the appellant
No.2 revealed that the entire family of the deceased had
been making serious attempts at re-conciliation. Even in
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 471
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
this letter there was not even a whisper/mention of any A
demand of dowry or of ill treatment.
(F) The letter dated 18. 7.1985 written by the father of the
deceased to his son Rajesh (PW.2) from Kalyan made it
clear that the author along with the deceased had gone to
8
Kalyan to meet the family of the appellants, and they were
not welcomed by the mother-in-law of the deceased at the
initial stage. They had been staying in Modern Guest
House in the same colony. Appellant No.1, the husband
of the deceased suggested that the deceased should meet
her mother-in-law and apologies, which was accepted by C
the deceased. The deceased met her mother-in-law and
apologized. After some time, the mother-in-law became
quiet and calm and started behaving properly and all the
appellants treated them well.
I D
(G) The un-dated letter (Ex.P-21) wri~ten by the deceased
to her father revealed that her mother~in-law wanted her to
separate herself from the other mem~ers of the family and
her parents. It also gave the impress~on that her mother-
in-law was asking for a gold chain ("z~nzir ke /iye keh rahi E
thi') and created problems for her in n1eeting her husband
and daughter. After the arrival of h~r brother-in-law to
Kalyan, the behaviour of her mother-in-law had improved
a lot, but her husband being busy in h s practice and did
not have sufficient time to be with her. F
(H) From the original record, a letter d~ted 1.4.1985 (E.xt.
• ' I
16), by the mother-in-law to the fathet of the deceased
seems to have been written after losing hope completely
and concluding that the deceased had become incorrigible.
The said letter suggests that the relation~hip between the G
deceased and her husband had come to an end. The
deceased had become a woman of bad character. They
had tolerated her to a great extent. The deceased had
been tutored by her mother; she had been misbehaving
with them and it had become difficult for them to tolerate H
472 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A her any more. The deceased had been using abusive
language to all the family members. She had lowered their
reputation and they had been very unlucky to have such a
daughter-in-law. As she wanted to live with Kake and not
with her husband, they did not want to have any relationship
B with her. [Appellant No. 3 had denied writing the said
letter].
(I) Another letter dated 22.5.1985, is on record written by
Jai Narain Gupta from Sandila, U.P. (who seems to be
relative of the deceased) wherein a suggestion had been
c made to patch up the matter. The author has drawn the
inference that the problems were being created for the
deceased, and she has been treated with cruelty as her
in-laws did not receive dowry according to their
expectations, though, there is no allegation that there has
D been any demand of dowry and for not giving the same.
(J) The undated letter written by the deceased to her aunt
Manorma Gupta at Barabanki does not suggest anything
against the accused, as the deceased had written that
E everything was fine and that she would discuss things when
they met. The undated letter written by her aunt in reply,
suggests that there was something amiss. She had
mentioned that the whole family was very disturbed, but
they were not able to suggest any solution. There was
F nothing to worry or fear as all of them were with the
deceased and she also told the deceased to face things
with courage, as she had equal rights to stay in the house
and to fight for justice.
12. pepositions of Prosecution witnesses (Relevant
G parts):
(I) Dr. Mohan Kulkarni, a practicing doctor residing in
the same building (PW.1 )-
"I know both accused Nos. 2 and 3 used to
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 473
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
occasionally visit their block at Waldhuni (Kalyan) after A
transfer of accused No.2 at Kurduwadi ..... I have no any
personal knowledge about the relations in between
accused No.1 and his deceased wife ..... lt is true that I was
told by accused No.1 some four or five month before the
incident that his wife Guddi was getting the attacks of B·
epileptic fits. The ailment of epileptic fits is of neurological
problems. I say that these medicines namely used in
neurological problems as gardenal, have their side effects
on the patient. E.C.T. (Electro Convulsive Therapy)
treatment is given to mental patients of some sort. If a c
person shows abnormal signs then he is branded as a
mental patient. I say that those who have tendency of
mental depression they tend to commit suicide. It is true
that mental disorder in some cases creates mental
depression."
D
(II) Rajesh (PW.2) (Brother of the deceased)-
"It is true that there was nothing wrong in between
the accused and Neeru till the delivery of a female child
and everything was smooth and cordial, in between E
them ......
I cannot say why it is not disclosed specifically in my
complaint that as accused no.3 instructed Neeru to fetch
golden ornaments on account of my marriage ceremony,
F
my father presented with four golden bangles in the
ceremony ...... .
I cannot say why it is not stated in my complaint that
after the birth of her daughter we presented Neeru with two
golden ear rings and golden chain of two tolas because G
those were demanded by her husband's family
members .....
As I did not remember the exact account of the
remaining ornaments presented to Neeru by us as and
H
474 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A when demanded by her in laws. I did not narrate about
them in the complaint. Except my words I have no
documentary evidence to show how many golden
ornaments were presented to Neeru and when ..... .
There is no reference to golden chain any other
B
letters except letter (Exh.21) sent by Neeru to my parents
and myself. That golden chain we give to Neeru in 1985
was weighing 2 and Yi to las .....
The only reference about the golden chain asked for
c by accused no.3 appears in letter (Exh.21) sent by Neeru
to us after she was reached at her in laws place on
24.8.1985."
(Ill) Manorma (PW.7) Aunt of deceased-
D "She told me that accused persons had demanded
a golden chain from her and hence she was not being
called back now shown inland letter dated 10.7.1985 which
is written by me to Neeru alias Guddi at Kanpur .....
E I have not stated before the police that when I met
Neeru in March 1985 she told me that accused persons
were demanding more golden ornaments from her and that
they were keeping her starving and were not allowing her
to meet her daughter Mili, and that she was craving to
F meet Mili. As I was not well at that time I forgot to narrate
the things before the police. I have told this fact for the
first time to the court ..... .
I have not written specifically in my two letters (Exh.39
and 40) addressed to my brother and sister in law that
G Neeru told me that she was subjected to physical assault
by the accused and that she was kept starving by the
accused and further accused demanded golden
ornaments from her."
H (IV) Ramkishan Gupta (PW.8) Father of deceased-
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 475
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
"I then arranged for a golden chain and sent Rajesh A
along with Neeru with a golden chain to Kalyan on
. 24.8.1985. Rajesh handed over golden chain to accused,
and left Neeru in her in laws house and returned back to
Kanpur. After 15 days we received a telegram sent by
brother of accused no.1 Pradeep Kumar that all was well B
in the house at Kalyan. On 29.9.1985 we received a
phone call informing us the said news of death of Neeru .....
I have not stated in letter (Exh.23/1) that while we
were standing out side the house of accused and
requesting them to accept Neeru, accused no.3 demanded C
a golden chain from us and refused to allow Neeru to see
her daughter in side the house, because Rajesh already
knew all these things at Kanpur. I have no documentary
evidence except my words to show that I had written to my
sister Manorama and to my brother that accused persons D
were demanding ..... .
I have not stated in either of my two statements
before the police that when accused no.3 came to attend
the wedding of my son Rajesh she demanded golden E
ornaments for herself (Accused no.3). I have not stated in
either of my two statements before the police that even
after the delivery of Neeru in 1981 none of the accused
persons came to Kanpur to visit her. I have not stated in
my first statement dated 1.10.1985 before the police that F
when Neeru came for delivery at Kanpur she informed us
that accused no.3 was demanding golden ornaments from
her. ....
I have not stated in either of my two statements
specifically that when I and my wife went to the house of G
accused on 17 .2.1985 we met all three accused at the
entrance and all of them asked me whether I had brought
golden ornaments or had come empty handed, and that
they had already asked Rajesh to bring along golden
ornaments and whereupon I told all three accused that I had H
476 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A not brought along golden ornaments as I was not having
them and where upon all three accused pointed out
towards Neeru and said as to how all those accused had
driven Neeru to such a condition and that they would
further make her condition miserable. I have not stated in
8 either of my two statements before the police that when
Neeru returned back to our house in March 1985 she told
us that all accused told her that till their demand for cash
and ornaments was not made, they would not allow Milito
go along with Neeru. I have not stated in either of my two
c statements before the police that when accused nos.2 and
3 had come to attend the marriage ceremony at Kanpur
in the month of March 1985 accused nos.2 and 3 did not
allow me to meet Mili. I had not stated in either of my two
statements before the police that when Rajesh brought
back Neeru in the month of June 1985 at Kanpur Neeru
D
told me that she was not allowed to meet her daughter
Mili in the house of her husband and accused no.3 asked
her if she had brought golden chain or not."
(V) Daulatram Nekumal Gurubani (PW.10), Doctor-
E
"ln the mid of February, 1985 accused No.1 told me
that his wife has become aggressive and was not co- ·
operative and also used to become violent. When I
reached the house of accused No.1, there I met accused
F No.2 and Accused No.3. I examined Neerubai, the wife of
accused No.1. She was lying in store room and was not
in a mood to talk anything with me even she become
aggressive with me in the sense she was not co-operative
with me. Accused No.1 told Neerubai that I was
psychotherapist of Thane Mental Hospital and then Neeru
G
asked me whether I treated my wife in the same way she
was being treated by her husband accused No.1. She
showed me injury marks bruises on her both knees and a
small injury on the lower lip and also bruises on the back.
She also told me that she was beaten by her family
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 477
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
members and by a ward boy of hospital. She also told me A
that she had been maltreated by her husband, by her
mother in law. She also told me that, her ornaments were
being worn by accused No.3. On seeing the injury marks
on her person I talked with accused No.1 and asked for·
details. Accused No.1 told me that as Neeru had become B
violent and we were controlling her it was possible that she
sustained small bruises .....
Accused No.1 told me that his wife was suffering
from epileptic fits since before her marriage and that she C
was on Geroin tablets. I told him that there were side effects
of this drug and the drug should be stopped after 3 years.
He told me that she was on drug for so many years and
she is maintained on thatdrugs. I told him to continue with
above tablets and consult Neurologistif she is suffering
from the above ailments. I visited her place for 4 times in D
the same month i.e. February, 1985. During all those visits
I never found any signs of epileptic fits ..... .
·Cross examination:
E
I started my practice in January 1985 at Ulhasnagar
and handed the case of Neeru in February 1985 after I
passed my M.D. Degree in Psychiatry in July 1984 though
I joined mental hospital at Thane as Medical Officer ..... .
I agree that even in major epilepsy this medicine F
Geroin is prescribed. It will not be correct to say that
because I prescribed medicine Geroin I was convinced
that the patient was suffering from major epilepsy. Even
though I knew that drug Geroin carried side effect yet I
prescribed it though I knew she had no sign of epilepsy G
because once the drug is started it cannot be abruptly
discontinued otherwise the patient may get fits. I stick to
the proposition that if an anti-convulsent drugs such as
Geroin is given for long period and withdrawn abruptly then
she rr:~~1 qet convulsions. I am backed by authority. Clin.ical H
478 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A examination alone cannot decide whether a patient is
suffering from epilepsy or not. Patient of epilepsy may have
a grand-ma! or petit-mal. It is true that dose of Geroin daily
is more in case of grand-ma! than in the case of petit-mal.
It is true that a maximum dose of Geroin tablets is 4 tablets
J3 3 times a day. I agree that brain scan, EEG and X-ray of
all the skull are required for investigations in cases of
epilepsy ....
It is true that drugs at Sr. Nos. 1 to 5 prescribed by
me to Mrs. Neeru wife Exh.46 are normally prescribed in
c . a case of epilepsy with psychoses and in depressive
state .... I have prescribed to Neeru E.C.T. treatment. .... It
is not stated in my prescription letter (Exh.46) that if the
drug as Sr. Nos. 1 to 5 prescribed to Neeru do not work
out, then E.C.T. therapy should be started to her, though
D verbally told her so. It is true that I have not specifically
stated in my prescription letter (Exh.46) at any time during
my visits to Mrs. Neeru on 4 or 5 occasions that as the
drugs at Sr.Nos. 1 to 5 in (Exh.46) were working, E.C.T.
therapy was not essential ..... I have not stated in my police
E statement that the room in which Neeru was found was an
unkept room or a store room. I have not stated before the
police that when I was introduced to Neeru as a
psychiatrist, Neeru asked me whether I treat my wife in the
same way as she was treated by her husband. I have not
F stated before the police that before Neeru was examined
by me she told me that she was harassed by accused
persons and that her ornaments were worn by accused
No.3 ..... .
I have not stated before the police that I examined
G
Neeru and found that there was not any gross
psychological problem but she was mentally disturbed and
I found that she had no faith in any of the members of the
family and I found that she was deprived of love, affection
and sympathy of her family members. I have not stated
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 479
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
before the police that accused No.1 told me she was also A
epileptic but I did not find any signs and symptoms of that
disease with her. I have not stated before the police that I
requested accused No.1 where was the X-ray of skull and
other investigation papers and accused No.1 told me that
his wife was suffering of epileptic fits since before her B
marriage and that she was on geroin tablet. I have not
stated before the police that I told him that there were side
effects of this drug and the drug should be stopped after
3 years .....
I agree that Mrs. Neeru did not meet me in April C
1985 but she brought the letter of April 1985 of Dr. S.
Mahendru in the month of June 1985. I have not stated
before the police that Neeru either met me in April 1985
or in June 1985. Beyond my word there is no any other
evidence to show that in September 1985 accused Nos. D
1 and 2 came to me. I have not stated before the police
that both accused Nos. 1 and 2 later on told me that Neeru
committed suicide and that they needed certificate about
her mental condition ..... "
E
(VI) Dr. Ramesh Kumar Mahendru (PW.12) - Doctor
. from Kanpur :
xxx
" ..... I say that the experts prescribed E.C.T. (Electro F
Convulsive treatment) in cases of retarded depression and,
manic depressive psychosis. I am shown the chart today
by the learned Defence counsel in which the prescription
of medicines advised by Dr. Gurubani for Niru and by me
are practically same except with a difference that the G
medicines mentioned at Sr.No.4 does not potentiate as
anti depressants but it prevents the reactions caused by
the medicines stated at Sr.No.3 in the chart .....
Narco therapy is a kind of suggestive psycho therapy H
480 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A under the influence of narcotic drugs such as barbiturates."
13. The above referred letters and the depositions of the
witnesses have to be understood/appreciated within the four
corners of law, particularly dealing with the issues of reversal
of the order of acquittal by the appellate court and
8
discrepancies/improvement/embellishment and contradictions
in the statements of the witnesses.
14. Material Contradictions:
c While appreciating the evidence, the court has to take into
consideration whether the contradictions/omissions had been
of such magnitude that they may materially affect the trial.
Minor contradictions, inconsistencies, embellishments or
improvements on trivial matters without effecting the core of the
0 prosecution case should not be made a ground to reject the
evidence in its entirety. The Trial Court, after going through the
entire evidence, must form an opinion about the credibility of
the witnesses and the appellate Court in normal course would
not be justified in reviewing the same again without justifiable
E reasons. (Vide: State Represented by Inspector of Police v.
Saravanan & Anr., AIR 2009 SC 152).
15. Where the omission(s) amount to a contradiction,
creating a serious doubt about the truthfulness of a witness and
other witness also make material improvements before the
F court in order to make the evidence acceptable. it cannot be
safe to rely upon such evidence. (Vide : State of Rajasthan v.
Rajendra Singh, (2009) 11 SCC 106).
16. The discrepancies in the evidence of eye-witnesses,
G if found to be not minor in nature, may be a ground for
disbelieving and discrediting their evidence. In such
circumstances, witnesses may not inspire confidence and if
their evidence is found to be in conflict and contradiction with
other evidence or with the statement already recorded, in such
H a case it cannot be held that prosecution proved its case
OR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 481
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
beyond reasonable doubt. (Vide: Mahendra Pratap Singh v. ~A
State of Uttar Pradesh, (2009) 11 SCC 334).
17. In case, the complainant in the FIR or the witness in
his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., has not disclosed
certain facts but meets the prosecution case first time before
8
the court, su~h version lacks credence and is. liable to be
discarded. (Vide: State Represented by Inspector of Police,
Tamil Nadu v. Sait @ Krishnakumar, (2008) 15 SCC 440).
18. In State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Kalki & Anr., AIR 1981
SC 1390, while dealing with this issue, this Court observed as C
under:
"In the depositions of witnesses there are always normal
discrepancies, however honest and truthful they may be.
These discrepancies are due to normal errors of o
observation, normal errors of memory due to lapse of time,
due to mental disposition such as shock and horror at the
time of the occurrence, and the like. Material
discrepancies are those which are not normal, and not
expected of a normal person."
E
.19. The courts have to label the category to which a
discrepancy belongs. While normal discrepancies do not
corrode the credibility of a party's case, material discrepancies
do so. (?ee: Syed Ibrahim v. State of A.P., AIR 2006 SC 2908;
and Arumugam v. State, AIR 2009 SC 331). F
20. In Bihari Nath Goswami v. Shiv Kumar Singh & Ors.,
(2004) 9 SCC 186, this Court examined the issue and held:
"Exaggerations per se do not render the evidence
1
brittle. But it car\ be one of the factors to test credibility of G
the prosecution version, when the entire evidence is put
in a crucible for being tested on the touchstone of
1
credibility."
21. While deciding such a case, the Court has to apply the H
482 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A aforesaid tests. Mere marginal variations in the statements
cannot be dubbed a~ improvements as the same may be
elaborations of the statement made by the witness earlier. The
omissions which amount to contradictions in material
particulars i.e. go to the root of the case/materially affect the
B trial or core of the prosecution's case, render the testimony of
the witness liable to be discredited.
Appeal against Acquittal:
22. It is a well-established principle of law, consistently re-
c iterated and followed by this Court is that while dealing with a
judgment of acquittal, an appellate court must consider the
entire evidence on record, so as to arrive at a finding as to
whetlier the views of the trial Court were perverse or otherwise
unsustainable. Even though the appellate court is entitled to
D consider, wheiher in arriving at a finding of fact, the trial Court
had placed the burden of proof incorrectly or failed to take into
consideration any admissible evidence and/or had taken into
consideration evidence brought on record contrary to law; the
appellate court should not ordinarily set aside a judgment of
E acquittal in a case where two views are possible, though the
view of the appellate court may be the more probable one. The
trial court which has the benefit of watching the demeanor of
the witnesses is the best judge of the credibility of the witnesses.
23. Every accused is presumed to be innocent unless his
F guilt is proved. The presumption of innocence is a human right.
Subject to the statutory exceptions, the said principle forms the
basis of criminal jurisprudence in India. The nature of the
offence, its seriousness and gravity has to be taken into
consideration.
G
The appellate court should bear in mind the presumption
of innocence of the accused, and further, that the trial court's
acquittal bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interference
with the decision of the Trial Court in a casual or cavalier
H manner where the other view is possible should be avoided,
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 48~
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
unless there are good reasons for such interference. A
24. In exceptional cases where there are compelling
circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be
perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of
acquittal. The findings of fact recorded by a court can be held
B
to be perverse if the findings have been arrived at by ignoring
or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration
irrelevanUinadmissible material. A finding may also be said to
be perverse if it is 'against the weight of evidence', or if the
finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice C
of irrationality. (See: Balak Ram & Anr. v. State of UP., AIR
1974 SC 2165; Shailendra Pratap & Anr. v. State of UP., AIR
2003 SC 1104; Budh Singh & Ors. v. State of UP., AIR 2006
SC 2500; S. Rama Krishna v. S. Rami Reddy (D) by his LRs.
& Ors., AIR 2008 SC 2066; Arulvelu & Anr. v. State, (2009)
10 SCC 206; Ram Singh alias Chhaju v. State of Himachal D
Pradesh, (2010) 2 SCC 445); and Babu v. State of Kera/a,
(201 o) 9 sec 189).
25. The instant case is required to be examined in light of
the aforesaid legal principles.
Undoubtedly, the record reveals that at an initial stage the
relationship between husband and wife had been very cordial
and they had love and affection for each other. At a later stage
when the family suspected an illicit relationship between the
deceased and Kake, the appellants were very much disturbed.
F
Both the families made serious attempts to re-concile and
patch up the matter and the appellants agreed that the
deceased may be given an opportunity to improve her
behaviour. Thus, admittedly there was a doubt that the
deceased had developed serious intimacy ~ith Kake, which G
was much more than what happens in normal course with a
family friend. Therefore, the finding recorded by the High Court
that the intimacy between them to the extent of having an illicit
relationship was not there, loses its sjgnificance, for the reason
that even the suspicion of such a matter becomes the talk of H
484 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R
A the town and the reputation of the family remains at stake. The
protests on the part of the appellants even on a mere suspicion
and asking the deceased to keep distance from Kake or
improve her behaviour is not something which can be termed
to be unwarranted or uncalled for.
B
26. There is ample evidence on record to suggest that the
deceased had been suffering from psychosis/mental dis-order.
According to Dr. Daulatram Nekumal Gurubani (PW.10) the
ailment was not of a very serious nature. However, the
C prescriptions given by Dr. Gurubani (PW.10) reveal that the
deceased had been suffering from serious mental dis-order,
otherwise such medicines could not have been prescribed by
him. He has prescribed the deceased the medicine Geroin
because he was convinced that the deceased was suffering
from major epilepsy, in spite of the fact that he was fully aware
D that the said drug has side effects. He also deposed that mere
clinical examination alone is not sufficient to decide whether the
patient is suffering from epilepsy. He further deposed that such
medicine can be given to a person suffering from grand-mal
epilepsy. More so, had it not been the case of serious ailment
E of mental dis-order, the question of prescribing and giving
E.C.T. to the deceased could not arise.
27. There had been a lot of improvements ,and
contradictions in his statements. The witness deposed for the
F first time in the court during the trial, that when he went to
examine the deceased, she was found in an unkept room/store
room and that he was introduced to the deceased as a
Psychiatrist and that the deceased had asked him whether he
treated his wife in the same way as she had been treated by
her husband. None of this was mentioned in his statement
G recorded by the police. Nor it had been recorded therein that
the deceased had told him that she was harassed by the
appellants and her ornaments were taken away/worn by her
mother in law (A.3). More so, he had not stated in his police
statement that the deceased was merely mentally disturbed and
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 485
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
not suffering from a gross psychological problem. Nor had he A
stated therein that the deceased had told him that she was not
having any faith in any of her family members and she was
deprived of their love, affection and sympathy. Such
contradictions in his statements cannot be held to be mere
explanations or elaborations of his version, but are tantamount B
to material contradictions or vital omissions. The Rules of
/appreciation of evidence requires that court should not draw
conclusions by picking up an isolated sentence of a witness
without adverting to the statement as a whole. In such a fact-
situation, it is not safe to rely on his testimony for the simple c
reason that he had made a lot of improvements/embellishments
while deposing in court and vital contradictions exist with his
I
earlier recorded statement. Thus, no reliance can be placed on
his depositions to hold that appellants had ill-treated the
deceased or that appellant No.3 had taken away/worn her D
qrnaments or that she had been deprived of their love and
affection or that she was not suffering from epilepsy etc.
28. The deposition of Dr. Mohan Kulkarni (PW.1) reveals
that E.C.T. treatment is given only to mental patients, who have
mental depression and tend to commit suicide; the ailment of E·
epileptic fits is a neurological problem .. His statement also
suggests that her in-laws had not been living with her after 1983,
as the appellant No.2 stood transferred to Kurudwadi and had
shifted to the said transferred place and her in-laws had been
visiting Kalyan occasionally. F
This view stands fully corroborated by the deposition of Dr.
Ramesh Kumar Mahendru (PW.12), Reader in Psychiatric
Medicine, Mental Hospital, Kanpur, as referred to herein above.
He had examined the deceased and prescribed medicines for G
manic depressive Psychosis. The prescription of this witness
substantially remained the same as of Dr. Daulatram Nekumal
Gurubani (PW.10).
The cumulative effect of the medical evidence given by
three Doctors leads us to the conclusion that deceased had H
48$·: SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R
A been suffering from manic depression and certainly had some
mental/epileptic/ psychosis problem.
29. So far as the other witnesses are concerned, they are
the father, brother and aunt of the deceased. Thus, being close
relatives, in such facts and circumstances they might have
8
developed inimical feelings towards the appellants, since they
came to the conclusion that the appellants were responsible for
the death of the deceased. However, their depositions are full
of contradictions and have marked improvements from their
statements recorded earlier. The exaggerations and
C improvements are of such a nature that they make their whole
statements in respect of the demand for gold ornaments and/
or the ill-treatment of the deceased liable to total disregard on
these counts. Gold ornaments had been given by the
complainants to the deceased out of love and free will at the
D time of the marriage of Rajesh (PW.2) and at the time of delivery
of her daughter Mili. Undoubtedly, Rajesh (PW.2) had alleged
in the FIR that there had been demand of gold ornaments by
the appellants without any details of the same, however, he
could not furnish any explanation as why this fact had not been
E disclosed to the police when his statement and supplementary
statement was recorded. Also no such inference can be drawn
from any of the letters on record. Only one un-dated letter (Ext.P-
21) written by the deceased to her father suggests that her
mother in-law had been asking for a chain. More so, as the
F chain had been given by the complainants to the deceased just
2/3 months before her death, and there is no evidence that any
further demand had been there, the issue became totally
irrelevant in terms of proving the motive, and it cannot be
presumed that any demand had been made. More so, even if
G it is presumed that there was some demand by appellant No.3,
as she is no more, and her appeal stands abated, this issue
becomes totally irrelevant for the reason that no such allegation
had ever been made against the remaining two appellants.
30. So far as the stay of the deceased with her parents
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 487
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
after coming from Kanpur to Kalyan at the guest house is A
concerned, admittedly at that time the relations between the
parties were strained because of the suspicion that the
deceased was having an illicit relationship with Kake. However,
it has been admitted by Ramkishan (PW.8), father of the
deceased, that subsequently the relations became normal and B
they were invited at the house of the appellants after the
deceased tendered an apology to her mother-in- law. The said
witness did not state in his statement before the police that
when he went to see the appellants on 17.2.1985, they had
asked him whether he had brought gold ornaments or had c
come empty handed or that he was told that the deceased
would not be allowed to live there and they would make her
condition even more miserable. Such an improvement was
made while deposing in court and no explanation could be
furnished by him as to why such vital facts were not stated by D
him at the time of recording his statement under Section 161
Cr.P.C. This statement is to be discarded as it is not safe to
hold the appellants guilty of the offences alleged against them
on such an improved version.
31. The deposition of Manorma (PW.7), aunt of the E
deceased is by no means different, as she had also made
major contradictions and improvements in her statement made
in court. She had not stated in her police statement that the
appellants were demanding gold ornaments from the deceased
and her family or that the appellants were keeping the F
deceased starving and were not allowing her to meet her
daughter, Mili. The explanation furnished by her that she had
not been feeling well and had forgotten to narrate such material
facts, cannot be believed.
G
32. The statement of Rajesh (PW.2), the brother of the
deceased is also full of contradictions and suffers from major
improvements. The contradictions are of such a nature that they
impair the whole of his evidence. The same cannot be held to
be clarificatory. He was not in a position to state what
H
488 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R
A ornaments his family had presented to the deceased on
different occasions. More so, it was not even stated in his
police statement that after the birth of Mili, his family had given
gold ornaments as demanded by the appellants. He could not
even furnish an explanation as to why the demand of a gold
s chain is not evident from any of the letters between the parties,
except in the letter (Ext. P-21 ).
33. The complainants have denied the receipt of letter
dated 3.4.1985 written by t~e appellant No.2 to the father of the
deceased, referred to hereinabove. However, the appellants
C have produced the correspondence with the post office and
proved the postal stamp to show that th·e said letter had been
sent by registered A.O. to Ramkishan Gupta (PW.8). The law
in this regard is well settled.
D In Gujarat Electricity Board & Anr. v. Atmaram Sungoma/
Poshani, AIR 1989 SC 1433, this court examined the issue
regarding the presumption of service of letter sent by registered
post under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 and
held as under:
E
"There is a presumption of service of a letter sent under
registered cover.... No doubt the presumption is rebuttable
and it is open to the party concerned to place evidence before
the court to rebut the presumption by showing that the address
mentioned on the cover was incorrect or that the postal
F authorities never tendered the registered letter to him ..... The
burden to rebut the presumption lies on the party challenging
the factum of service." (Emphasis added)
A similar view has been re-iterated by this court in Chief
G Commissioner of Income Tax (Administration}, Bangalore v.
V.K. Gururaj & Ors., (1996) 7 SCC 275; and Shim/a
Development Authority & Ors. v. Santosh Sharma (Smt.) &
Anr., (1997) 2 sec 637.
In Harihar Banerji v. Ramshashi Roy, AIR 1918 PC 102,
H
DR. SUNIL KUMAR SAMBHUDAYAL GUPTA v. 489
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.]
a similar view had been taken by the Privy Council, referring A
to Illustration (f) of Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act,
1872.
1·
In view of the above, it was the responsibility of the
complainants to prove by adducing evidence of the official of 8
the Post Office, Kanpur that the said letter had not been
delivered to them. However, for the reasons best known to the
prosecution such an exercise has not been undertaken.
34. ·The instant case is required to be examined from
another angle also. The marriage took place on 1st December, C
1 ~78. The complainant party could not place any
correspondence on record prior to February 1985 except letter
dated 24th February, 1979 written by the deceased herself to
her husband. However, it goes in favour of the appellants.
Therefore, it is evident that the controversy arose only after the D
expiry of the period of more than 6 years from the date of
marriage. It is quite possible that the dispute arose between
the parties only because of the suspicion that the deceased had
developed an illicit relationship with Kake. Had there been a
demand of dowry or ill-treatment to her on any other ground by E
the appellants, there could have been some correspondence
between the parties during the aforesaid long period of more
than 6 years. None of the prosecution witnesses had made any
allegation of any demand of dowry or ill treatment during the
said earlier period. It is unnatural that after expiry of such a F
long period, the appellants suddenly became greedy and
started demanding ornaments and for not meeting their
demand, started ill treating the deceased to the extent that she
had to commit suicide. Thus, the allegations made by the
complainant party remained unnatural and improbable. More G
so, the demand had been only of a thin gold chain which could
not be very expensive in those days, especially given the socio-
economic status of all the parties. For the gold ornament worth
such a petty amount after the expiry of a long period of about
6 Y:; years, from the date of marriage, it is not natural that the H
490 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A appellants could treat the deceased with such cruelty that she
was drawn to commit suicide.
35. It is a clear cut case of gross abuse of the dowry laws.
We find it difficult to sustain the conviction of the appellants on
8 the aforesaid counts based upon the inconsistent, embellished
and improved statements of the witnesses, which materially
contradict their respective statements recorded earlier. The
High Court did not dislodge the reasons given by the Trial Court
for acquittal. The High Court did not make any reference to
C the deposition of Dr. Daulatram Nekumal Gurubani (PW.10) in
the cross-examination and dealt with the case very casually,
adopting a very superficial approach to the whole matter and
. brushed aside the allegation of an illicit relationship for which
there had been documentary evidence on record without
recording any cogent reasons for the same. The High Court
D did not make any attempt to appreciate the evidence with
accuracy and reversed the findings of the trial court which were
based on the evidence on record and for which detailed
reasons had been assigned.
E 36. In view of the above, the appeal succeeds and is
allowed. The judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay,
dated 29.4.2004, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 865 of 1987
is set aside. The judgment and order of the Trial court in
Sessions Case No. 25/1986 dated 21.5.1987 is hereby
restored. The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds stand
discharged.
D.G. Appeal allowed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "dowry death"Sign in to search