Justice Deshpande further noted that the deceased sustained 97 per cent burns at a time when all the accused persons were present in the matrimonial house.
“Such burn injuries were sustained within a period of three years from her marriage. Prior to the said incident, there are allegations by her parents that she was subjected to ill-treatment and demand of dowry. Therefore, rejecting such contention on assumptions and conjectures as well as on flimsy ground, is not at all justified,” the judge opined.
Therefore, the Bench found it a fit case for exercising jurisdiction under Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) since the sessions judge completely ignored settled propositions of law with regard to dowry death, appreciation of evidence in connection with demand wherein normally there is no independent witness, and thirdly, with regard to dying declaration which appears to be not genuine.
“Thus, acquitting all accused persons on these grounds is a miscarriage of justice. Deceased and her parents suffered at the behest of said judgment and therefore, interference is necessary,” the Bench concluded.
Source: Barandbench
